I'm not sure it is deadlocking the debugger.  lldb is just waiting for a stop.  
For instance ^C should interrupt it, or sending a signal externally to the 
process, or triggering a breakpoint or crash, etc.  

Actually, Greg must have fixed the bug I was remembering, because this works 
correctly for me with TOT lldb.

What happens for you if your .lldbinit has:

file a.out
break set -n main
run

For me this stops at the breakpoint at main.  We still have a little clean up 
to do here, because I don't see the stop notification in this case.  I see:

 > lldb -S cmds.lldb 
(lldb) command source -s 1 'cmds.lldb'
4 locations added to breakpoint 1
(lldb) 

but if I then do "bt" I'm sitting at main:

(lldb) bt
* thread #1: tid = 0x1bf8a4, function: main , stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
  * frame #0: 0x0000000100018e87 Sketch`main at SKTMain.m:17
    frame #1: 0x00007fff94f445ad libdyld.dylib`start
    frame #2: 0x00007fff94f445ad libdyld.dylib`start

Not sure what's up with the stutter at start either.  But that's a different 
rabbit to chase...

Jim


> On Mar 20, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
> 
> If that's the case, then a .lldbinit file like this:
> 
> file a.out
> run
> 
> Will deadlock the debugger, because the real stop never comes?
> 
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:35 PM <jing...@apple.com> wrote:
> That's the stop at entry stop.  The code you quoted is in a block that starts 
> with:
> 
>         if (launch_info.GetFlags().Test(eLaunchFlagStopAtEntry) == false)
>         {
> 
> So we've stopped at the entry point, but the user didn't want to know about 
> that, so we resume and wait for a "real" stop.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> > On Mar 20, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm a little confused.  You said that in synchronous execution, Launch 
> > won't return until the process has stopped.  That makes sense, but it 
> > already checks that the process has stopped once regardless of whether 
> > synchronous execution is set.  Then, it calls PrivateResume() (even if 
> > synchronous_execution is set), and then waits for the process to stop 
> > again?  What would trigger this second stop?  Target::Launch already asked 
> > it to resume, so now it's happily running while Target::Launch is waiting 
> > for it to stop a second time.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:23 PM <jing...@apple.com> wrote:
> > In synchronous execution, the "Launch" command won't return till the 
> > process has stopped.  The point of synchronous execution is that you can do:
> >
> > break set -n foo
> > run
> > bt
> >
> > So "run" can't return till the breakpoint has been hit.  That is why it 
> > waits for the process to stop.  I'm not quite sure why this is done in 
> > Target::Launch, in other cases (e.g. in for "step" and "continue" the 
> > command object is the one that takes care of waiting for the stop.  Launch 
> > is a little funny however, because it can't use the normal process wait 
> > mechanism to do its job since the real process isn't alive when it has to 
> > start waiting...
> >
> > I think the reason you are hanging here is that the code that reads in all 
> > the init statements runs an event loop temporarily while it is reading them 
> > in, and the kills that and hands off the the real command execution loop, 
> > and this continuation gets lost in the handoff.  I thought Greg had already 
> > fixed that, but maybe it's still sitting in his queue.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 20, 2015, at 3:57 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I ran into an issue earlier where I tried to make a .lldbinit file with 
> > > some lines like this:
> > >
> > > file a.out
> > > run
> > >
> > >
> > > When this happens the process runs, the breakpoint gets hit and I see the 
> > > source listing, it returns to the lldb prompt, but then I can't type 
> > > anything.  It appears LLDB is deadlocked inside of Target::Launch() at 
> > > the following location:
> > >
> > >                 if (!synchronous_execution)
> > >                     m_process_sp->RestoreProcessEvents ();
> > >
> > >                 error = m_process_sp->PrivateResume();
> > >
> > >                 if (error.Success())
> > >                 {
> > >                     // there is a race condition where this thread will 
> > > return up the call stack to the main command
> > >                     // handler and show an (lldb) prompt before 
> > > HandlePrivateEvent (from PrivateStateThread) has
> > >                     // a chance to call PushProcessIOHandler()
> > >                     m_process_sp->SyncIOHandler(2000);
> > >
> > >                     if (synchronous_execution)
> > >                     {
> > >
> > > state = m_process_sp->WaitForProcessToStop (NULL, NULL, true, 
> > > hijack_listener_sp.get(), stream);
> > >                         const bool must_be_alive = false; // eStateExited 
> > > is ok, so this must be false
> > >                         if (!StateIsStoppedState(state, must_be_alive))
> > >                         {
> > >                             error.SetErrorStringWithFormat("process isn't 
> > > stopped: %s", StateAsCString(state));
> > >                         }
> > >                     }
> > >                 }
> > >
> > > Normally when I'm using LLDB and entering the commands myself, this 
> > > synchronous_execution value is not set, and everything works as expected. 
> > >  How is this supposed to work?  What does my plugin need to do 
> > > differently in order to handle this case?  The process has already 
> > > stopped once and resumed, so I'm not sure why it would need to stop 
> > > again?  I see that it's not restoring process events in the case of 
> > > synchronous execution, so maybe it should have never resumed in the first 
> > > place? _______________________________________________
> > > 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

Reply via email to