Hi Mario, sorry I missed this one over the holidays. The problem here is the '[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V' function. It has a mid-function epilogue which lldb can't handle today on x86_64. This is a common idiom on armv7/arm64 - I have experience with how to solve the problem there but I had never seen a compiler generate code like this on x86_64 so it wasn't handled there.
In your example session, when you're stopped at 0x000000010014bb5f, lldb is no longer able to backtrace. Looking at the disassembly, we see that 0x10014bb5f is just past a mid-function epilogue. We'll need to update the x86_64 assembly unwinder to recognize the epilogue sequence and re-install the previous unwind state before the epilogue unwound it. 0x10014bb38 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V>: pushq %rbp 0x10014bb39 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+1>: movq %rsp, %rbp 0x10014bb3c <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+4>: subq $0x20, %rsp 0x10014bb40 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+8>: movq %rdi, -0x8(%rbp) 0x10014bb44 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+12>: movq -0x10000(%rsp), %rax 0x10014bb4c <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+20>: movl %esi, -0xc(%rbp) 0x10014bb4f <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+23>: cmpl $0x64, -0xc(%rbp) 0x10014bb53 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+27>: movq %rdi, -0x18(%rbp) 0x10014bb57 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+31>: jle 0x10014bb5f ; [J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V + 39 at InvalidFrame.java:13 0x10014bb59 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+33>: addq $0x20, %rsp 0x10014bb5d <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+37>: popq %rbp 0x10014bb5e <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+38>: retq 0x10014bb5f <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+39>: movl -0xc(%rbp), %eax 0x10014bb62 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+42>: addl $0x1, %eax 0x10014bb65 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+45>: movl %eax, -0x10(%rbp) 0x10014bb68 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+48>: movl -0x10(%rbp), %esi 0x10014bb6b <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+51>: movq -0x18(%rbp), %rdi 0x10014bb6f <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+55>: callq 0x10014bb38 ; [J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V at InvalidFrame.java:10 0x10014bb74 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+60>: addq $0x20, %rsp 0x10014bb78 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+64>: popq %rbp 0x10014bb79 <[J]com.robovm.debug.server.apps.InvalidFrame.testRecursion(I)V+65>: retq > On Dec 23, 2014, at 6:59 AM, Mario Zechner <badlogicga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > i'm running into stack unwinding issues when trying to get a backtrace for a > currently selected thread. You can see the output of diagnose-unwind here: > https://gist.github.com/badlogic/99736e5c37f54ea08481 > > The simple stack walking algorithm in diagnose-unwind succeeds in > reconstructing the correct frames. > > Any idea what I could be doing wrong or how i could fix this issue? > > Thanks, > Mario > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
