[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil updated this revision to Diff 234672. jankratochvil added a comment. Herald added subscribers: MaskRay, emaste. Herald added a reviewer: espindola. Changing the size of symbols turned out to be too invasive. Let's keep it intact. Rather choose the best symbols from those which have

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

omjavaid added a comment. @jankratochvil I have verified both D71498 and D71514 . They **do not fix** the issues introduced by D63540 . Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. @omjavaid Do you still see any regression of this patch after D71498 ? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. @omjavaid FYI the JIT error happens for me on `2019-09-26-raspbian-buster` even without this my patch. I will try to debug that. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. FYI I am investigating it. I have found 2019-09-26-raspbian-buster.zip really can run in chroot on Fedora 31 armv7hl so I should be able to reproduce it. It is building LLDB now, that takes about 6 hours.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jasonmolenda added a comment. In D63540#1766693 , @omjavaid wrote: > Hi Jan, > > I have done further investigation on this with new ampere arm server. This > problem manifests itself on all kind of Debian flavors and is not related to > underlying

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

omjavaid added a comment. Hi Jan, I have done further investigation on this with new ampere arm server. This problem manifests itself on all kind of Debian flavors and is not related to underlying libraries. I have tested LLDB on Arm 32bit host with Ubuntu Xenial, Bionic and Debian Buster all

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:57:46 +0100, Omair Javaid wrote: > I am running Arm and AArch64 tests on docker containers running Ubuntu > Xenial. Could you run it outside of the docker if the problem still happens? Could you suggests which variant should I try? There are many:

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

I am running Arm and AArch64 tests on docker containers running Ubuntu Xenial. Underlying hardware is Thunder X1 or D05 machines. On Tue, 19 Nov 2019, 3:31 pm Jan Kratochvil via Phabricator, < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > jankratochvil added a comment. > > @omjavaid I guess it depends on

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

Hi Jan, This is known problem and fix is posted here https://reviews.llvm.org/D70155 Please use cmake argument -DLLVM_HOST_TRIPLE=arm-linux-gnueabihf as a workaround. Thanks! On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 21:27, Jan Kratochvil via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > jankratochvil added

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. @omjavaid In the end I built a native `armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf` lldb using: cmake ../llvm-monorepo/llvm/ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS="lldb;clang;lld" -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB Built it from trunk:

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 at 15:04, Jan Kratochvil via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > jankratochvil added a comment. > > Getting `ld.lld: error: failed to open ../../../../bin/clang-10: Cannot > allocate memory` when trying to build `lldb` natively on arm32 (the same > error happens

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. Getting `ld.lld: error: failed to open ../../../../bin/clang-10: Cannot allocate memory` when trying to build `lldb` natively on arm32 (the same error happens both for `clang` and for `lldb`). Apparently memory is not a problem but the linker runs out of its

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

omjavaid added a comment. In D63540#1744110 , @jankratochvil wrote: > It is still the same (no arm32 regression) with > `16bdcc809c72c639a2888b6b859dca88453e3c28` and this patch reapplied. Hi Jan, This issue manifests itself only when lldb test suite

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. It is still the same (no arm32 regression) with `16bdcc809c72c639a2888b6b859dca88453e3c28` and this patch reapplied. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. @omjavaid I do not have the regression reproducible, could you provide more info? Having on both hosts trunk `54a9b4c02ff57e9847e0c501578e51db6f73d3be` having applied your D69904 , having reverted your revert (=reapplied) of this

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Revision". This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGa6c40f56aed1: Revert Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size (authored by omjavaid). Changed

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. I am going to investigate it this week. Feel free to revert it but some such patch is definitely needed for all recent Fedoras, RHEL-8 and CentOS-8 (due to annobin on all

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

omjavaid reopened this revision. omjavaid added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Hi Jan, This change has introduced a regression in 32bit arm linux testsuite with around 60 new test failures. Here are list of tests which are failing with this change. Mostly tests are

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. jankratochvil marked an inline comment as done. Closed by commit rL364773: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size (authored by jankratochvil, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil marked 2 inline comments as done. jankratochvil added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/lit/SymbolFile/sizeless-symbol.test:5 + +image lookup --address 1 +# CHECK: Summary: sizeless-symbol.test.tmp.o`sizeful clayborg wrote: > Symbols are ordered in

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/lit/SymbolFile/sizeless-symbol.test:5 + +image lookup --address 1 +# CHECK: Summary: sizeless-symbol.test.tmp.o`sizeful Symbols are ordered in the same order as they appear in the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil updated this revision to Diff 207252. jankratochvil marked 2 inline comments as done. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540 Files: lldb/lit/SymbolFile/Inputs/sizeless-symbol.s

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil marked 5 inline comments as done. jankratochvil added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/lit/SymbolFile/sizeless-symbol.test:10 +image dump symtab +# CHECK:Index UserID DSX TypeFile Address/Value Load Address Size Flags Name

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Looks good to me, but I'd suggest waiting a while to give @clayborg a chance to respond... Comment at: lldb/lit/SymbolFile/sizeless-symbol.test:4 + +image lookup --address

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil added a comment. In D63540#1558347 , @clayborg wrote: > I am saying to leave symbols with zero size as is _if_ there is another > symbol that does have a valid size with the same start address. This is what this patch does. > Exactly.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil updated this revision to Diff 206905. jankratochvil marked 2 inline comments as done. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63540 Files: lldb/lit/SymbolFile/Inputs/sizeless-symbol.s

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil marked 4 inline comments as done. jankratochvil added a comment. In D63540#1549977 , @labath wrote: > Why was it necessary to change the iteration order here? No, it was an accidental leftover. Thanks for the review.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

clayborg added a comment. In D63540#1556989 , @labath wrote: > In D63540#1550858 , @clayborg wrote: > > > So I am fine with symbols having zero size being in the symbol table. I > > would be fine not changing

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

labath added a comment. In D63540#1550858 , @clayborg wrote: > So I am fine with symbols having zero size being in the symbol table. I would > be fine not changing anything in the sorting and leaving some symbols with > zero size, we just need to fix: >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

clayborg added a comment. my fix assumes we would have zero sized symbols first in the m_file_addr_to_index map, and the symbols with the same size would be ordered after the ones with zero size. Also, I am assuming when we do: const FileRangeToIndexMap::Entry *entry =

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

clayborg added a comment. So I am fine with symbols having zero size being in the symbol table. I would be fine not changing anything in the sorting and leaving some symbols with zero size, we just need to fix: Symbol *Symtab::FindSymbolAtFileAddress(addr_t file_addr); To ignore zero sized

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

labath added a comment. The fix seems reasonable to me. There's just one thing I don't get: Why was it necessary to change the iteration order here? IIUC, the real business happens on line 904, where you add the `if (entry[i].base == entry[i+1].base) break;` check. I could be missing something,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D63540: Fix lookup of symbols at the same address with no size vs. size

jankratochvil created this revision. jankratochvil added reviewers: clayborg, labath. jankratochvil added a project: LLDB. Herald added subscribers: teemperor, aprantl. This fixes a failing testcase on Fedora 30 x86_64 (regression Fedora 29->30): PASS: ./bin/lldb