In templated const functions, trying to run an expression would produce the
error
error: out-of-line definition of '$__lldb_expr' does not match any declaration
in 'foo' member declaration does not match because it is const qualified
error: 1 error parsing expression
which is no good. It turned out we don't actually need to worry about "const,"
we just need to be consistent about the declaration of the expression and the
FunctionDecl we inject into the class for "this."
Also added a test case.
<rdar://problem/24985958>
llvm-svn: 268083
This reverts commit r267833 as it breaks the build. It looks like some work in progress got
committed together with the actual fix, but I'm not sure which one is which, so I'll revert the
whole patch and let author resumbit it after fixing the build error.
llvm-svn: 267861
The code in ClangExpressionDeclMap::FindExternalVisibleDecls figures out what the token
means, and adds the namespace to the lookup context, but since it doesn't mark it as
special in the search context, we go on to pass the name $__lldb_local_vars to the ASTSource
for further lookup. Unless we've done our job wrong, those lookups will always fail, but
the can be costly.
So I added a bit to m_found & use that to short-circuit the lookup.
<rdar://problem/25613384>
llvm-svn: 267842
within a source file.
This isn't done, I need to make the name match smarter (right now it requires an
exact match which is annoying for methods of a class in a namespace.
Also, though we use it in tests all over the place, it doesn't look like we have
a test for Source Regexp breakpoints by themselves, I'll add that in a follow-on patch.
llvm-svn: 267834
In templated const functions, trying to run an expression would produce the
error
error: out-of-line definition of '$__lldb_expr' does not match any declaration in 'foo'
member declaration does not match because it is const qualified
error: 1 error parsing expression
which is no good. It turned out we don't actually need to worry about "const,"
we just need to be consistent about the declaration of the expression and the
FunctionDecl we inject into the class for "this."
Also added a test case.
<rdar://problem/24985958>
llvm-svn: 267833
There's an open bug with calling functions in the inferior. And Windows doesn't have the POSIX function getpid().
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19626
llvm-svn: 267800
Summary:
If the remote uses svr4 packets to communicate library info,
the LoadUnload tests will fail, as lldb only used the basename
for modules, causing problems when two modules have the same basename.
Using absolute path as sent by the remote will ensure that lldb
locates the module from the correct directory when there are overlapping
basenames. When debugging a remote process, LoadModuleAtAddress will still
fall back to using basename and module_search_paths, so we don't
need to worry about using absolute paths in this case.
Reviewers: ADodds, jasonmolenda, clayborg, ovyalov
Subscribers: lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19557
llvm-svn: 267741
to use the default clang C/C++ expression parser when debugging
Rust programs. Ideally there would be a rust language plugin to
support their language natively, but until then this will get simple
variable display to work.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19545
llvm-svn: 267667
Use __attribute__((regparm(x))) to ensure the compiler enregisters at least some arguments when calling functions.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19548
llvm-svn: 267616
but when there's was no process it was just returning an null pointer
and not setting the error. I don't have a scenario where this might
go wrong, just code inspection...
llvm-svn: 267594
Python 3.5 is pickier about the distinction between chars and bytes (and strings and bytearrays) than Python 2.7.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19510
llvm-svn: 267562
Remove case handling elf arm attribute Tag_THUMB_ISA_use and setting architecture to thumb.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19520
llvm-svn: 267550
rL267291 introduces a lot regression on arm-linux LLDB testsuite.
This patch fixes half of them. I am merging it under already revied android counterpart.
Another patch fixing rest of the issue will follow this commit.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19480
llvm-svn: 267508
statements for, be sure not to include variables that have no locations. We wouldn't
be able to realize them, and that will cause all expressions to fail.
llvm-svn: 267500
Summary:
If the remote uses include features when communicating
xml register info back to lldb, the existing code would reset the
lldb register index at the beginning of each include node.
This would lead to multiple registers having the same lldb register index.
Since the lldb register numbers should be contiguous and unique,
maintain them accross the parsing of all of the xml feature nodes.
Reviewers: jingham, jasonmolenda, clayborg
Subscribers: lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19303
llvm-svn: 267468
Summary:
When we receive an svr4 packet from the remote, we check for new modules
and add them to the list of images in the target. However, we did not
do the same for modules which have been removed.
This was causing TestLoadUnload to fail when using ds2, which uses
svr4 packets to communicate all library info on Linux. This patch fixes
the failing test.
Reviewers: zturner, tfiala, ADodds
Subscribers: lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19230
llvm-svn: 267467
Summary:
eRegisterKindProcessPlugin is used to store the register
indices used by the remote, and eRegisterKindLLDB is used
to store the internal lldb register indices. However, we're currently
using the lldb indices instead of the process plugin indices
when sending p/P packets. This will break if the remote uses
non-contiguous register indices.
Reviewers: jasonmolenda, clayborg
Subscribers: lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19305
llvm-svn: 267466
Summary:
lldb-server tests are currently being skipped on the
check-lldb target. This is because we get the path of
lldb-server by modifying the path to the lldb executable.
However, by this point, we've changed directories, and a
relative path to the build/bin directory will no longer point
to the location of lldb-server.
Storing an absolute path solves this issue.
Reviewers: vharron, zturner, tfiala, labath
Subscribers: labath, lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19082
llvm-svn: 267463
Summary:
Do not assume that liblldb.so is located in $(lldb -P)/../../../lib
when creating the _lldb python symlink. Instead, use the path passed
to LLVM_LIBDIR_SUFFIX, defaulting to $(lldb -P)/../../../lib when this
variable is not set.
Reviewers: vharron, emaste, zturner
Subscribers: zturner, labath, lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19067
llvm-svn: 267462
Summary:
"gcc" is equivalent to "ehframe" in ProcessGDBRemote, but
only "ehframe" was a valid response in the test suite.
Reviewers: tfiala, jasonmolenda, clayborg
Subscribers: lldb-commits, sas
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18807
llvm-svn: 267459
Test added in r267248 exposed a bug in handling of dwarf produced by clang>=3.9, which causes a
crash during expression evaluation. Skip the test until this is sorted out.
llvm-svn: 267407
Make sure we figure out correct plt entry field in case linker has generated a small value below realistic entry size like 4 bytes or below.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19252
llvm-svn: 267405
This option evaluates an expression and, if the result is of pointer type, treats it as if it was an array of that many elements and displays such elements
This has a couple subtle points but is mostly as straightforward as it sounds
Add a parray N <expr> alias for this new mode
Also, extend the --object-description mode to do the moral equivalent of the above but display each element in --object-description mode
Add a poarray N <expr> alias for this
llvm-svn: 267372
RegisterContextLLDB::InitializeNonZerothFrame already has code to attempt
to detect and handle the case where the PC points beyond the end of a
function, but there are certain cases where this doesn't work correctly.
In fact, there are *two* different places where this detection is attempted,
and the failure is in fact a result of an unfortunate interaction between
those two separate attempts.
First, the ResolveSymbolContextForAddress routine is called with the
resolve_tail_call_address flag set to true. This causes the routine
to internally accept a PC pointing beyond the end of a function, and
still resolving the PC to that function symbol.
Second, the InitializeNonZerothFrame routine itself maintains a
"decr_pc_and_recompute_addr_range" flag and, if that turns out to
be true, itself decrements the PC by one and searches again for
a symbol at that new PC value.
Both approaches correctly identify the symbol associated with the PC.
However, the problem is now that later on, we also need to find the
DWARF CFI record associated with the PC. This is done in the
RegisterContextLLDB::GetFullUnwindPlanForFrame routine, and uses
the "m_current_offset_backed_up_one" member variable.
However, that variable only actually contains the PC "backed up by
one" if the *second* approach above was taken. If the function was
already identified via the first approach above, that member variable
is *not* backed up by one but simply points to the original PC.
This in turn causes GetEHFrameUnwindPlan to not correctly identify
the DWARF CFI record associated with the PC.
Now, in many cases, if the first method had to back up the PC by one,
we *still* use the second method too, because of this piece of code:
// Or if we're in the middle of the stack (and not "above" an asynchronous event like sigtramp),
// and our "current" pc is the start of a function...
if (m_sym_ctx_valid
&& GetNextFrame()->m_frame_type != eTrapHandlerFrame
&& GetNextFrame()->m_frame_type != eDebuggerFrame
&& addr_range.GetBaseAddress().IsValid()
&& addr_range.GetBaseAddress().GetSection() == m_current_pc.GetSection()
&& addr_range.GetBaseAddress().GetOffset() == m_current_pc.GetOffset())
{
decr_pc_and_recompute_addr_range = true;
}
In many cases, when the PC is one beyond the end of the current function,
it will indeed then be exactly at the start of the next function. But this
is not always the case, e.g. if there happens to be alignment padding
between the end of one function and the start of the next.
In those cases, we may sucessfully look up the function symbol via
ResolveSymbolContextForAddress, but *not* set decr_pc_and_recompute_addr_range,
and therefore fail to find the correct DWARF CFI record.
A very simple fix for this problem is to just never use the first method.
Call ResolveSymbolContextForAddress with resolve_tail_call_address set
to false, which will cause it to fail if the PC is beyond the end of
the current function; or else, identify the next function if the PC
is also at the start of the next function. In either case, we will
then set the decr_pc_and_recompute_addr_range variable and back up the
PC anyway, but this time also find the correct DWARF CFI.
A related problem is that the ResolveSymbolContextForAddress sometimes
returns a "symbol" with empty name. This turns out to be an ELF section
symbol. Now, usually those get type eSymbolTypeInvalid. However, there
is code in ObjectFileELF::ParseSymbols that tries to change the type of
invalid symbols to eSymbolTypeCode or eSymbolTypeData if the symbol
lies within the code or data section.
Unfortunately, this check also hits the symbol for the code section
itself, which is then marked as eSymbolTypeCode. While the size of
the section symbol is 0 according to the ELF file, LLDB considers
this size invalid and attempts to figure out the "correct" size.
Depending on how this goes, we may end up with a symbol that overlays
part of the code section, even outside areas covered by real function
symbols.
Therefore, if we call ResolveSymbolContextForAddress with PC pointing
beyond the end of a function, we may get this bogus section symbol.
This again means InitializeNonZerothFrame thinks we have a valid PC,
but then we don't find any unwind info for it.
The fix for this problem is me to simply always leave ELF section
symbols as type eSymbolTypeInvalid.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18975
llvm-svn: 267363
This adds basic parsing of the EABI attributes section. This section contains
additional information about the target for which the file was built. Attempt
to infer additional architecture information from that section.
llvm-svn: 267291
Some older versions of clang emitted bit offsets that were negative and these bitfields would have their bitfield-ness stripped off and it would cause a clang assertion in clang assertions were enabled. I updated the bitfield C test to make sure we don't regress.
<rdar://problem/21082998>
llvm-svn: 267248
Conditionalise a variable definition which may be unused in certain compilations
due to the preprocessor. Protect the variable accordingly. NFC.
llvm-svn: 267247
Chaoren Lin