Hi Petr - Thanks! That "get_next_pcs" idiom is exactly the direction I was heading in, and it looks like you've done a much more thorough job than I would have.
The pmachata/arm branch works perfectly for me, and even fixes a bug that I had on my todo-list but had not characterized yet. I'm squared away. Sorry I do not know how to assist getting any of these changes into Debian's release cycle... - Greg On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 07:48:26PM +0100, Petr Machata wrote: > Greg Alexander <[email protected]> writes: > > > Thanks, I got the git tree now. I am surprised how far ahead of > > debian-unstable it is. > > You might want to consider rebasing to 0.7.2 in Debian. That is fairly > stable version in my opinion, which finally supports threads, fully > understands parameter passing convention, and allows tracing not only > the main binary, but libraries as well. It doesn't however support ARM. > See below for that. > > > The build problem and syscall tracing have both already been fixed. :) > > Great, glad to hear that. > > > The PTRACE_SINGLESTEP issue remains: > > 26753 couldn't continue when handling __libc_start_main (0x9e88) at 0x9e88 > > Please take a look at the branch pmachata/arm. We actually have a full > instruction decoding logic for software singlestepping now, ported from > GDB. > > Your idea of trying PTRACE_SINGLESTEP first is appealing. Some ARM > devices reportedly are capable of hardware singlestepping, but I don't > know if the Linux kernel supports that at all, and if yes, whether > there's a way to detect that you run on such hardware. Unfortunately we > can't simply try PTRACE_SINGLESTEP, as older kernels did their own > emulation, which was unreliable, and we want to avoid using that. > > Thanks, > PM > _______________________________________________ Ltrace-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltrace-devel
