This teaches lldb-test how to launch a process, set up an IRMemoryMap,
and issue memory allocations in the target process through the map. This
makes it possible to test IRMemoryMap in a targeted way.
This has uncovered two bugs so far. The first bug is that Malloc
performs an adjustment on the pointer returned from AllocateMemory (for
alignment purposes) which ultimately allows overlapping memory regions
to be created. The second bug is that after most of the address space on
the host side is exhausted, Malloc may return the same address multiple
times. These bugs (and hopefully more!) can be uncovered and tested for
with targeted lldb-test commands.
At an even higher level, the motivation for addressing these bugs is
that they can lead to strange user-visible failures (e.g, variables
assume the wrong value during expression evaluation, or the debugger
crashes). See my third comment on this swift-lldb PR for an example:
https://github.com/apple/swift-lldb/pull/652
I hope lldb-test is the right place to add this testing harness. Setting
up a gtest-style unit test proved too cumbersome (you need to recreate
or mock way too much debugger state), as did writing end-to-end tests
(it's hard to write a test that actually hits a buggy path).
With lldb-test, it's easy to read/generate the test input and parse the
test output. I'll attach a simple "fuzz" tester which generates failing
test cases to the Phab review. Here's an example:
```
Command: malloc(size=1024, alignment=32)
Malloc: address = 0xca000
Command: malloc(size=64, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xca400
Command: malloc(size=1024, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xca440
Command: malloc(size=16, alignment=8)
Malloc: address = 0xca840
Command: malloc(size=2048, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xcb000
Command: malloc(size=64, alignment=32)
Malloc: address = 0xca860
Command: malloc(size=1024, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xca890
Malloc error: overlapping allocation detected, previous allocation at [0xca860, 0xca8a0)
```
{F6288839}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47508
llvm-svn: 333583
Summary:
lldb-test already had the ability to dump all symbol information in a
module. This is interesting, but it can be too verbose, and it also does
not use the same APIs that lldb uses to query symbol information. The
last part is interesting to me now, because I am about to add DWARF v5
debug_names support, which needs to implement these APIs.
This patch adds a set of arguments to lldb-test, which modify it's
behavior from dumping all symbols to dumping only the requested
information:
- --find={function,namespace,type,variable} - search for the given
kind of objects.
- --name - the name to search for.
- --regex - whether to treat the "name" as a regular expression. This is
not available for all lookup types (we do not have the required APIs
for namespaces and types).
- --context - specifies the context, which can be used to restrict the
search. This argument takes a variable name (which must be defined and
be unique), and we then use the context that this variable is defined
in as the search context.
- --function-flags={auto,full,base,method,selector} - a set of flags to
further restrict the search for function symbols.
Together, these flags and their combinations cover the main SymbolFile
entry points which I will need to modify for the accelerator table
support, and so I plan to do most of the regression testing this way.
(I've also found this a useful tool for exploration of what the given
APIs are supposed to do.)
I add a couple of tests to demonstrate the usage of the usage of the
various options, and also an xfailed test which demonstrates a bug I
found while playing with this. The only requirement for these tests is
the presence of lld -- the should run on any platform which is able to
build lldb.
These tests use c++ code as input, but this isn't a requirement. It is also
possible to use IR, assembly or json to create the test module.
Reviewers: davide, zturner, asmith, JDevlieghere, clayborg, alexshap
Subscribers: mgorny, aprantl, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46318
llvm-svn: 331447
This reverts commit r327318. It breaks the Xcode and CMake Darwin
builders:
clang: error: no such file or directory:
'.../source/Plugins/Architecture/PPC64/ArchitecturePPC64.cpp'
clang: error: no input files
More details are in https://reviews.llvm.org/D42582.
llvm-svn: 327327
Summary:
The test was failing in remote debugging scenario with windows as a host
as cmd.exe is not able to parse the complicated shell commands in the
Makefile.
The test seemed like a perfect candidate for a more focused testing
approach, so I have rewritten in on top of lldb-test's module-sections
functionality. The slight gotcha there was that the
Module::GetSectionList does not include the sections from the symbol
file until someone manually calls Module::GetSymbolVendor. Normally,
this is not an issue, because someone will have initialized the symbol
vendor by the time anyone starts looking at the sections. However, when
all one this is dump the section list, we run into this problem.
I've tried making this behavior more automatic, but it turns out it's
not that easy, so for now, I just manually initialize the Symbol Vendor
before dumping out the sections in lldb-test.
Reviewers: jankratochvil
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42914
llvm-svn: 326805
Summary:
The command takes two input arguments: a module to use as a debug target
and a file containing a list of commands. The command will execute each
of the breakpoint commands in the file and dump the breakpoint state
after each one.
The commands are expected to be breakpoint set/remove/etc. commands, but
I explicitly allow any lldb command here, so you can do things like
change setting which impact breakpoint resolution, etc. There is also a
"-persistent" flag, which causes lldb-test to *not* automatically clear
the breakpoint list after each command. Right now I don't use it, but
the idea behind it was that it could be used to test more complex
combinations of breakpoint commands (set+modify, set+disable, etc.).
Right now the command prints out only the basic breakpoint state, but
more information can be easily added there. To enable easy matching of
the "at least one breakpoint location found" state, the command
explicitly prints out the string "At least one breakpoint location.".
To enable testing of breakpoints set with an absolute paths, I add the
ability to perform rudimentary substitutions on the commands: right now
the string %p is replaced by the directory which contains the command
file (so, under normal circumstances, this will perform the same
substitution as lit would do for %p).
I use this command to rewrite the TestBreakpointCaseSensitivity test --
the test was checking about a dozen breakpoint commands, but it was
launching a new process for each one, so it took about 90 seconds to
run. The new test takes about 0.3 seconds for me, which is approximately
a 300x speedup.
Reviewers: davide, zturner, jingham
Subscribers: luporl, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43686
llvm-svn: 326112
Summary:
We use the llvm decompressor to decompress SHF_COMPRESSED sections. This enables
us to read data from debug info sections, which are sometimes compressed,
particuarly in the split-dwarf case. This functionality is only available if
llvm is compiled with zlib support.
Reviewers: clayborg, zturner
Subscribers: emaste, mgorny, aprantl, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40616
llvm-svn: 320813
This is basically a proof-of-concept and starting point for having a
testing-centric tool in LLDB. I'm sure this leaves a lot of room to be
desired, but this at least allows us to have something to build on.
Right now there is only one command, the `module-sections` command, and I
created this command not because it was particularly special, but
because it addressed an immediate use case and was extremely simple.
Run the tool as `lldb-test module-sections <path-to-object>`.
Feel free to add testing related stuff to your heart's content after
this goes in. Implementing the commands themselves takes some work, but
once they're there they can be reused without writing any code and
result in very easy to use and maintain tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40636
llvm-svn: 319504
Vedant Kumar