| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
The architectures provided to skipIf / expectedFail are regular
expressions (v. _match_decorator_property() in decorators.py
so on Darwin systems "arm64" would match the skips for "arm" (32-bit
Linux). Update these to "arm$" to prevent this, and also update
three tests (TestBuiltinFormats.py, TestCrossDSOTailCalls.py,
TestCrossObjectTailCalls.py) that were skipped for arm64 via this
behavior, and need to be skipped or they will fail.
This was moviated by the new TestDynamicValue.py test which has
an expected-fail for arm, but the test was passing on arm64 Darwin
resulting in failure for the CIs.
|
|
TestAddressMasks failed on the lldb-arm-buntu bot with the
Code address mask test,
mask = process.GetAddressMask(lldb.eAddressMaskTypeAny)
process.SetAddressMask(lldb.eAddressMaskTypeCode, mask | 0x3)
self.assertEqual(
0x000002950001F694,
process.FixAddress(0x00265E950001F697, lldb.eAddressMaskTypeCode),
)
The API returned 0x000002950001f694 instead of the expected
0x00265e950001f696. The low bits differ because ABISysV_arm hardcodes
the Code address mask to clear the 0th bit, it doesn't use the
Process code mask. I didn't debug why some of the high bytes were
dropped. The address mask APIs are only important on 64-bit targets,
where many of the bits are not used for addressing and are used for
metadata instead, so I'm going to skip these tests on 32-bit arm
instead of debugging.
|
|
[lldb] Add SBProcess methods for get/set/use address masks (#83095)
I'm reviving a patch from phabracator, https://reviews.llvm.org/D155905
which was approved but I wasn't thrilled with all the API I was adding
to SBProcess for all of the address mask types / memory regions. In this
update, I added enums to control type address mask type (code, data,
any) and address space specifiers (low, high, all) with defaulted
arguments for the most common case. I originally landed this via
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83095 but it failed on CIs
outside of arm64 Darwin so I had to debug it on more environments
and update the patch.
This patch is also fixing a bug in the "addressable bits to address
mask" calculation I added in AddressableBits::SetProcessMasks. If lldb
were told that 64 bits are valid for addressing, this method would
overflow the calculation and set an invalid mask. Added tests to check
this specific bug while I was adding these APIs.
This patch changes the value of "no mask set" from 0 to
LLDB_INVALID_ADDRESS_MASK, which is UINT64_MAX. A mask of all 1's
means "no bits are used for addressing" which is an impossible mask,
whereas a mask of 0 means "all bits are used for addressing" which
is possible.
I added a base class implementation of ABI::FixCodeAddress and
ABI::FixDataAddress that will apply the Process mask values if they
are set to a value other than LLDB_INVALID_ADDRESS_MASK.
I updated all the callers/users of the Mask methods which were
handling a value of 0 to mean invalid mask to use
LLDB_INVALID_ADDRESS_MASK.
I added code to the all AArch64 ABI Fix* methods to apply the
Highmem masks if they have been set. These will not be set on a
Linux environment, but in TestAddressMasks.py I test the highmem
masks feature for any AArch64 target, so all AArch64 ABI plugins
must handle it.
rdar://123530562
|
|
This reverts commit 9a12b0a60084b2b92f728e1bddec884a47458459.
TestAddressMasks fails its first test on lldb-x86_64-debian,
lldb-arm-ubuntu, lldb-aarch64-ubuntu bots. Reverting while
investigating.
|
|
I'm reviving a patch from phabracator, https://reviews.llvm.org/D155905
which was approved but I wasn't thrilled with all the API I was adding
to SBProcess for all of the address mask types / memory regions. In this
update, I added enums to control type address mask type (code, data,
any) and address space specifiers (low, high, all) with defaulted
arguments for the most common case.
This patch is also fixing a bug in the "addressable bits to address
mask" calculation I added in AddressableBits::SetProcessMasks. If lldb
were told that 64 bits are valid for addressing, this method would
overflow the calculation and set an invalid mask. Added tests to check
this specific bug while I was adding these APIs.
rdar://123530562
|
