Summary:
Previously the ABI plugin exposed some "register infos" and the
gdb-remote code used those to fill in the missing bits. Now, the
"filling in" code is in the ABI plugin itself, and the gdb-remote code
just invokes that.
The motivation for this is two-fold:
a) the "augmentation" logic is useful outside of process gdb-remote. For
instance, it would allow us to avoid repeating the register number
definitions in minidump code.
b) It gives more implementation freedom to the ABI classes. Now that
these "register infos" are essentially implementation details, classes
can use other methods to obtain dwarf/eh_frame register numbers -- for
instance they can consult llvm MC layer.
Since the augmentation code was not currently tested anywhere, I took
the opportunity to create a simple test for it.
Reviewers: jasonmolenda, clayborg, tatyana-krasnukha
Subscribers: aprantl, lldb-commits
Tags: #lldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70906
lldb would silently accept a response to the 'g' packet
(read all registers) which was too large; this handles the
case where it is too small.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70417
<rdar://problem/34916465>
The mock server pretends the process stopped with signal 17, which is
SIGCHLD on linux. This causes lldb to resume to process, utterly
confusing the test. Lldb probably shouldn't resume in this case, but for
now this issue can be fixed by changing the signal number to 2, which is
SIGINT just about anywhere.
until we can automatically fall back to p/P if g/G are not supported;
it looks like there is a bug in debugserver's g/G packets taht needs
to be fixed, or debugserver should stop supporting g/G until that bug
is fixed. But we need lldb to be able to fall back to p/P correctly
for that to be a viable workaround.
and that lldb uses the expedited register values in the ? packet
aka stop packet (T11 etc) and does not re-fetch them with the p packet.
This test is currently failing from the "[lldb-server] Add setting to
force 'g' packet use" commit; I'm marking it as @expectedFailureAll
until we can get this fixed.
Following up on https://reviews.llvm.org/D62221, this change introduces
the settings plugin.process.gdb-remote.use-g-packet-for-reading. When
they are on, 'g' packets are used for reading registers.
Using 'g' packets can improve performance by reducing the number of
packets exchanged between client and server when a large number of
registers needs to be fetched.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62931
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
> llvm-svn: 374584
llvm-svn: 374631
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
> llvm-svn: 374584
llvm-svn: 374626
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
> llvm-svn: 374584
llvm-svn: 374622
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
> llvm-svn: 374584
llvm-svn: 374620
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
> llvm-svn: 374584
llvm-svn: 374609
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
llvm-svn: 374584
Summary:
Someone wrote SetEffectiveSetEffectiveGroupID instead of SetEffectiveUserID.
After this fix, the android process list can show user names, e.g.
```
PID PARENT USER GROUP EFF USER EFF GROUP TRIPLE ARGUMENTS
====== ====== ========== ========== ========== ========== ============================== ============================
529 1 root 0 root 0 /sbin/ueventd
```
Reviewers: labath,clayborg,aadsm,xiaobai
Subscribers:
llvm-svn: 373953
Summary:
For context: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68293
We need a way to show all the processes on android regardless of the user id.
When you run `platform process list`, you only see the processes with the same user as the user that launched lldb-server. However, it's quite useful to see all the processes, though, and it will lay a foundation for full apk debugging support from lldb.
Before:
```
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
3234 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android adbd
8034 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9096 3234 aarch64-unknown-linux-android sh
9098 9096 aarch64-unknown-linux-android lldb-server
(lldb) ^D
```
Now:
```
(lldb) platform process list -x
205 matching processes were found on "remote-android"
PID PARENT USER TRIPLE NAME
====== ====== ========== ======================== ============================
1 0 init
524 1 init
525 1 init
531 1 ueventd
568 1 logd
569 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android servicemanager
570 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android hwservicemanager
571 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android vndservicemanager
577 1 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
580 577 aarch64-unknown-linux-android qseecomd
...
23816 979 com.android.providers.calendar
24600 979 com.verizon.mips.services
27888 979 com.hualai
28043 2378 com.android.chrome:sandboxed_process0
31449 979 com.att.shm
31779 979 com.samsung.android.authfw
31846 979 com.samsung.android.server.iris
32014 979 com.samsung.android.MtpApplication
32045 979 com.samsung.InputEventApp
```
Reviewers: labath,xiaobai,aadsm,clayborg
Subscribers:
llvm-svn: 373931
the platform in the setUp/tearDown methods. I want to migrate the
re-instatement of the correct plaform to the setUp base method but
haven't had time to look at that yet, so I want to land this handful
of fixes until I get to it.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66331
llvm-svn: 369484
rL357954 did increase `packet-timeout` 1sec -> 5secs. Which is IMO about the
maximum timeout reasonable for regular use. But for testsuite I think the
timeout should be higher as the testsuite runs in parallel and it can be run
even on slow hosts and with other load (moreover if it runs on some slow arch).
I have chosen 60 secs, that should be enough hopefully. Larger value could
make debugging with hanging `lldb-server` annoying.
This patch was based on this testsuite timeout:
http://lab.llvm.org:8014/builders/lldb-x86_64-fedora/builds/546/steps/test/logs/stdio
FAIL: test_connect (TestGDBRemoteClient.TestGDBRemoteClient)
Test connecting to a remote gdb server
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/jkratoch/slave-lldb-x86_64-fedora/lldb-x86_64-fedora/llvm/tools/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/gdb_remote_client/TestGDBRemoteClient.py", line 13, in test_connect
process = self.connect(target)
File "/home/jkratoch/slave-lldb-x86_64-fedora/lldb-x86_64-fedora/llvm/tools/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/gdb_remote_client/gdbclientutils.py", line 480, in connect
self.assertTrue(error.Success(), error.description)
AssertionError: False is not True : failed to get reply to handshake packet
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65271
llvm-svn: 367234
on a thread. When talking to some older gdb-remote stubs, We were getting
a stop reason from the stop reply packet and setting it on the relevant
thread before we updated the full stop list. That would get discarded when
the full list was updated.
Also, if you already have a thread list when you go to see if there is an
Operating System plugin, and you do indeed load a new OS plugin, you have to
re-fetch the thread list or it will only show the raw threads.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62887
llvm-svn: 364666
The qemu x86_64 target returns a target.xml register definition file which
includes other xml files and they include others, etc. Also, the registers
are not put in register groups like lldb wants to see.
This patch (1) puts registers that aren't in a register group in a "general"
register group, (2) change ProcessGDBRemote::GetGDBServerRegisterInfo to
be a method that starts the parsing, asking a recurisve function to fetch
and parse target.xml, (3) adds
ProcessGDBRemote::GetGDBServerRegisterInfoXMLAndProcess which can recusively
call itself to read and parse included xml files, (4) in addition to expecting
the top-level <target> element (which only happens in the top level xml file),
also an xml file that consists of a <feature> node - read the register
defintions and includes from that <feature> element.
<rdar://problem/49537922>
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63802
llvm-svn: 364484
logging when the testsuite is run with trace mode enabled are leaving
the logging enabled after the tests have finished. That state
isn't cleared in a --no-multiprocess testsuite run.
llvm-svn: 360480
The test was hitting llvm_unreachable in
Platform::GetSoftwareBreakpointTrapOpcode because it could not figure
out the architecture of the process. Since that is not the purpose of
the test, I change the test to use an explicit
CreateTargetWithFileAndTargetTriple command to specify it.
llvm-svn: 357456
Summary:
In case of a breakpoint site overlapping with the destination address,
the WriteMemory method reported an incorrect memory size.
Instead of returning the right amount of bytes written, it falls through
the scope and returned 0.
Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani <medismail.bennani@gmail.com>
Reviewers: jasonmolenda, friss, jingham
Subscribers: JDevlieghere, davide, lldb-commits, #lldb
Tags: #lldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60022
llvm-svn: 357420
This applies the same fix that was done in r354106 to the lldb-server
test: bitcasting the string to a bytes object before sending it over a
socket. Since the gdb-remote protocol occasionally contains binary data,
and it does not assign any particular encoding to them, this is the
right thing to do here.
llvm-svn: 354114
qWatchpointSupportInfo packet correctly.
In GDBRemoteCommunicationClient::GetWatchpointSupportInfo,
if the response to qWatchpointSupportInfo does not
include the 'num' field, then we did not get an answer
we understood, mark this target as not supporting that
packet.
In Target.cpp, rename the very confusingly named
CheckIfWatchpointsExhausted to CheckIfWatchpointsSupported,
and check the error status returned by
Process::GetWatchpointSupportInfo. If we cannot determine
what the number of supported watchpoints are, assume that
they will work. We'll handle the failure
later when we try to create/enable the watchpoint if the
Z2 packet isn't supported.
Add a gdb_remote_client test case.
<rdar://problem/42621432>
llvm-svn: 346561
Add support in ProcessGDBRemote::GetGDBServerRegisterInfo
for recognizing a generic "arm" architecture that will be used if
nothing better is available so that we don't ignore the register
definitions if we didn't already have an architecture set.
Also in ProcessGDBRemote::DoConnectRemote don't set the target
arch unless we have a valid architecture to set it to.
Platform::ConnectProcess will try to get the current target's
architecture, or the default architecture, when creating the
target for the connection to be attempted. If lldb was started
with a target binary, we want to create this target with that
architecture in case the remote gdb stub doesn't supply a
qHostInfo arch.
Add logging to Target::MergeArchitecture.
<rdar://problem/34916465>
llvm-svn: 345106
Summary:
If the names are not unique, the tests overwrite each other's results and logs. This also causes failures on platforms where the files are locked for writing.
The names of the class/test pairs *have to* always be unique. The easiest way to achieve that is to name each class differently (usually the same as the file name).
Reviewers: jasonmolenda, asmith
Subscribers: clayborg, nemanjai, kbarton, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53297
llvm-svn: 344547
Using a listen queue of length 0 caused a deadlock on my machine in the
gdb-client tests while attempting to establish the loopback socket
connection.
I am not sure if this is down to a different python or kernel version,
but in either case, having queue of length zero sounds like a bad idea,
so I'm bumping that to one (which also fixes the deadlock).
llvm-svn: 341096
Summary:
The test suite has often unnecessary trailing whitespace, and sometimes
unnecessary trailing lines or a missing final new line. This patch just strips
trailing whitespace/lines and adds missing newlines at the end.
Subscribers: ki.stfu, JDevlieghere, christof, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49943
llvm-svn: 338171
Summary:
1) In logtest.cpp, the name of the file that is reported is not always capitalized, so split the comparison to validate the file (case insensitive) and function (case sensitive) separately
2) Update the gdb remote client tests to work with Python 3. In Python 3, socket sends/receives data as bytes rather than byte strings. This also updates the usage of .hex() - this is no longer available in Python 3, so use hexlify instead
Reviewers: asmith, labath, zturner
Reviewed By: labath
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46773
llvm-svn: 332293
Summary:
If the remote stub sends a specific error message instead of just a E??
code, we can use this to display a more informative error message
instead of just the generic "unable to attach" message.
I write a test for this using the SB API.
On the console this will show up like:
(lldb) process attach ...
error: attach failed: <STUB-MESSAGE>
if the stub supports error messages, or:
error: attach failed: Error ??
if it doesn't.
Reviewers: jingham, JDevlieghere
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45573
llvm-svn: 330247
When we're dealing with virtual (memory) threads created by the OS
plugins, there's no guarantee that the real thread and the backing
thread share a protocol ID. Instead, we should iterate over the memory
threads to find the virtual thread that is backed by the current real
thread.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45497
rdar://36485830
The original revision (r329891) was reverted because the associated
tests ran into a deadlock on the Linux bots. That problem was resolved
by r330002.
llvm-svn: 330005
When we're dealing with virtual (memory) threads created by the OS
plugins, there's no guarantee that the real thread and the backing
thread share a protocol ID. Instead, we should iterate over the memory
threads to find the virtual thread that is backed by the current real
thread.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45497
rdar://36485830
llvm-svn: 329891
Summary:
First attempt at landing D42145 was reverted because it caused test
failures on some android devices. It turned out this was because these
devices had vdso modules with differing physical and virtual addresses.
This was not caught earlier because all of the modules in our tests
either lack physical addresses or have them identical to virtual ones.
In the discussion on the patch, we came to the conclusion that in the
scenario where we are merely setting a load address of a module (for
example from a dynamic loader plugin), we should always use virtual
addresses (i.e., preserve status quo). This patch adds a test to make
sure we don't regress in that direction.
Reviewers: owenpshaw
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44738
llvm-svn: 328485
Pavel Labath