Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja added a comment. Hello @ldrumm, I did investigate the issue and my finding is that incorrect values are being passed to the SetDataWithReadMemoryFallback function. Now I suspect the ElfSectionHeader is wrongly parsed in your case and the size and offsets obtained are wrong. To talk

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja added a comment. Hello, Ok I will take a look. http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ldrumm added a subscriber: ldrumm. ldrumm added a comment. This differential seems to have introduced a regression on x86_64 Android, where `std::bad_alloc` is thrown during process attach. I've reverted this locally, and filed a bug , but as this is

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

tberghammer accepted this revision. tberghammer added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Looks good http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailm

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

labath added a comment. Looks good as far as I am concerned. @tberghammer, @ovyalov ? http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja updated this revision to Diff 45238. ravitheja added a comment. correcting previous revision. http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/inferior-assert/TestInferiorAssert.py packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/unwind/noreturn

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

labath added a comment. I think this looks *much* nicer than the previous version. I personally would replace the `std::function` dance with something simpler such as `bool use_memory_fallback`, but I guess that's a matter of taste. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/Ob

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja updated this revision to Diff 45185. ravitheja added a comment. Changes according to http://reviews.llvm.org/D16151 http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/inferior-assert/TestInferiorAssert.py packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functiona

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ovyalov added a comment. If vdso bug pertains to ELF format then it looks reasonable to keep the fix within ObjectFileELF. I experimented a while ago with making ObjectFileELF to read from arbitrary offsets - please see http://reviews.llvm.org/D16151 as reflection of this idea (patch is pretty

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja added a comment. Yes the vdso is fine, last year I did discuss this and we here decided that at the moment we can only offer this solution. http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://li

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja added a comment. Hi Oleyksiy, actually the problem is not with the Elf Format but its a problem with the ObjectFileElf itself which cannot handle reading from arbitrary offsets in the Elf. Now the ideal solution would be to fix that but as we had discussed last year we agreed to alloc

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

tberghammer added a comment. Based on your description the vdso file itself looks like a valid elf file to me. If the ObjectFileELF plugin is buggy (it is certainly is as it can't handle the vdso) then I think we should fix that instead of building up a new approach just to work around one of o

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ravitheja added a comment. Hi Tamas, a modified algorithm may work in this case for now, but this issue may still reoccur for some other Elf Format . http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://li

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

ovyalov added a comment. vdso issue is related to ELF format and I'm wondering whether we can keep the fix contained in ObjectFileELF - for example, if a section that we're trying to read is beyond the boundaries of memory buffer we can read its content from inferior's memory using ObjectFile::

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

tberghammer added a comment. Can we calculate the size of the object file based on elf headers and the section headers instead of using the /proc file system? I think a good algorithm would be to take the maximum of the following 2 expression: Start of section header + Number of section head

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

labath added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107#324594, @labath wrote: > Could you explain what is the nature of the failure in the vdso parsing? Strike that. I see that you have linked the bug # in the title... http://reviews.llvm.org/D16107 _

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16107: Fix for Bug 25338

labath added a comment. Could you explain what is the nature of the failure in the vdso parsing? Otherwise it's quite hard to see what's the relationship of your patch to it, as it seems that the ObjectFile should be able to handle files which are not fully contained within the initial read (co