lldb had three preprocessor defines for logging,
LLDB_LOG - formatv style argument
LLDB_LOGF - printf style argument
LLDB_LOGV - formatv style argument, only when verbose enabled
If you weren't looking at Log.h and the definition of these three, and
wanted to log something with formatv, it was easy to use LLDB_LOGV by
accident. We just had a situation where an important log statement
wasn't logging and it turned out to be this. This is fragile if you
aren't looking at the header directly, so I'd like to make this more
explicit. My proposal:
LLDB_LOG - formatv style argument
LLDB_LOG_VERBOSE - formatv style argument, only when verbose enabled
LLDB_LOGF - printf style argument
LLDB_LOGF_VERBOSE - printf style argument, only when verbose enabled
The new fouth one is to remove several places where we do `if (log &&
log->GetVerbose()) LLDB_LOGF (...)` in the sources today, and make both
styles consistent.
This PR implements that change, mechanically changing all LLDB_LOGV's to
LLDB_LOG_VERBOSE.
It also updates many of the `if (log && log->GetVerbose()) LLDB_LOGF`'s.
Some uses of this conditional expression do extra calculations in
addition to logging, and so those were left as-is so we're not doing
throwaway work when running without verbose logging.
There were many instances throughout lldb where callers are still doing
`if (log) LLDB_LOG*(...)`, a remnant of when all calls were to the `Log`
object's `Printf()` method, and you had to check if your local Log*
pointer was non-nullptr before calling the method. I removed those,
again keeping ones where work for logging is done in the block of code.
The code changes are all mechanical and uninteresting, but the question
of whether this naming change is widely agreed on is maybe worth
discussing.
This patch replaces a local implementation of bit_ceil with
llvm::bit_ceil. Technically, the local implementation evaluates to 0
on input 0, whereas llvm::bit_ceil evaluates to 1, but that doesn't
matter because we have:
// Can't watch zero bytes.
if (user_size == 0)
return {};
debugserver on arm64 devices can manage both Byte Address Select
watchpoints (1-8 bytes) and MASK watchpoints (8 bytes-2 gigabytes). This
adds a SupportedWatchpointTypes key to the QSupported response from
debugserver with a list of these, so lldb can take full advantage of
them when creating larger regions with a single hardware watchpoint.
Also add documentation for this, and two other lldb extensions, to the
lldb-gdb-remote.txt documentation.
Re-enable TestLargeWatchpoint.py on Darwin systems when testing with the
in-tree built debugserver. I can remove the "in-tree built debugserver"
in the future when this new key is handled by an Xcode debugserver.
This patch is the next piece of work in my Large Watchpoint proposal,
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-large-watchpoint-support-in-lldb/72116
This patch breaks a user's watchpoint into one or more
WatchpointResources which reflect what the hardware registers can cover.
This means we can watch objects larger than 8 bytes, and we can watched
unaligned address ranges. On a typical 64-bit target with 4 watchpoint
registers you can watch 32 bytes of memory if the start address is
doubleword aligned.
Additionally, if the remote stub implements AArch64 MASK style
watchpoints (e.g. debugserver on Darwin), we can watch any power-of-2
size region of memory up to 2GB, aligned to that same size.
I updated the Watchpoint constructor and CommandObjectWatchpoint to
create a CompilerType of Array<UInt8> when the size of the watched
region is greater than pointer-size and we don't have a variable type to
use. For pointer-size and smaller, we can display the watched granule as
an integer value; for larger-than-pointer-size we will display as an
array of bytes.
I have `watchpoint list` now print the WatchpointResources used to
implement the watchpoint.
I added a WatchpointAlgorithm class which has a top-level static method
that takes an enum flag mask WatchpointHardwareFeature and a user
address and size, and returns a vector of WatchpointResources covering
the request. It does not take into account the number of watchpoint
registers the target has, or the number still available for use. Right
now there is only one algorithm, which monitors power-of-2 regions of
memory. For up to pointer-size, this is what Intel hardware supports.
AArch64 Byte Address Select watchpoints can watch any number of
contiguous bytes in a pointer-size memory granule, that is not currently
supported so if you ask to watch bytes 3-5, the algorithm will watch the
entire doubleword (8 bytes). The newly default "modify" style means we
will silently ignore modifications to bytes outside the watched range.
I've temporarily skipped TestLargeWatchpoint.py for all targets. It was
only run on Darwin when using the in-tree debugserver, which was a proxy
for "debugserver supports MASK watchpoints". I'll be adding the
aforementioned feature flag from the stub and enabling full mask
watchpoints when a debugserver with that feature is enabled, and
re-enable this test.
I added a new TestUnalignedLargeWatchpoint.py which only has one test
but it's a great one, watching a 22-byte range that is unaligned and
requires four 8-byte watchpoints to cover.
I also added a unit test, WatchpointAlgorithmsTests, which has a number
of simple tests against WatchpointAlgorithms::PowerOf2Watchpoints. I
think there's interesting possible different approaches to how we cover
these; I note in the unit test that a user requesting a watch on address
0x12e0 of 120 bytes will be covered by two watchpoints today, a
128-bytes at 0x1280 and at 0x1300. But it could be done with a 16-byte
watchpoint at 0x12e0 and a 128-byte at 0x1300, which would have fewer
false positives/private stops. As we try refining this one, it's helpful
to have a collection of tests to make sure things don't regress.
I tested this on arm64 macOS, (genuine) x86_64 macOS, and AArch64
Ubuntu. I have not modifed the Windows process plugins yet, I might try
that as a standalone patch, I'd be making the change blind, but the
necessary changes (see ProcessGDBRemote::EnableWatchpoint) are pretty
small so it might be obvious enough that I can change it and see what
the Windows CI thinks.
There isn't yet a packet (or a qSupported feature query) for the gdb
remote serial protocol stub to communicate its watchpoint capabilities
to lldb. I'll be doing that in a patch right after this is landed,
having debugserver advertise its capability of AArch64 MASK watchpoints,
and have ProcessGDBRemote add eWatchpointHardwareArmMASK to
WatchpointAlgorithms so we can watch larger than 32-byte requests on
Darwin.
I haven't yet tackled WatchpointResource *sharing* by multiple
Watchpoints. This is all part of the goal, especially when we may be
watching a larger memory range than the user requested, if they then add
another watchpoint next to their first request, it may be covered by the
same WatchpointResource (hardware watchpoint register). Also one "read"
watchpoint and one "write" watchpoint on the same memory granule need to
be handled, making the WatchpointResource cover all requests.
As WatchpointResources aren't shared among multiple Watchpoints yet,
there's no handling of running the conditions/commands/etc on multiple
Watchpoints when their shared WatchpointResource is hit. The goal beyond
"large watchpoint" is to unify (much more) the Watchpoint and Breakpoint
behavior and commands. I have a feeling I may be slowly chipping away at
this for a while.
Re-landing this patch after fixing two undefined behaviors in
WatchpointAlgorithms found by UBSan and by failures on different
CI bots.
rdar://108234227
This patch is the next piece of work in my Large Watchpoint proposal,
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-large-watchpoint-support-in-lldb/72116
This patch breaks a user's watchpoint into one or more
WatchpointResources which reflect what the hardware registers can cover.
This means we can watch objects larger than 8 bytes, and we can watched
unaligned address ranges. On a typical 64-bit target with 4 watchpoint
registers you can watch 32 bytes of memory if the start address is
doubleword aligned.
Additionally, if the remote stub implements AArch64 MASK style
watchpoints (e.g. debugserver on Darwin), we can watch any power-of-2
size region of memory up to 2GB, aligned to that same size.
I updated the Watchpoint constructor and CommandObjectWatchpoint to
create a CompilerType of Array<UInt8> when the size of the watched
region is greater than pointer-size and we don't have a variable type to
use. For pointer-size and smaller, we can display the watched granule as
an integer value; for larger-than-pointer-size we will display as an
array of bytes.
I have `watchpoint list` now print the WatchpointResources used to
implement the watchpoint.
I added a WatchpointAlgorithm class which has a top-level static method
that takes an enum flag mask WatchpointHardwareFeature and a user
address and size, and returns a vector of WatchpointResources covering
the request. It does not take into account the number of watchpoint
registers the target has, or the number still available for use. Right
now there is only one algorithm, which monitors power-of-2 regions of
memory. For up to pointer-size, this is what Intel hardware supports.
AArch64 Byte Address Select watchpoints can watch any number of
contiguous bytes in a pointer-size memory granule, that is not currently
supported so if you ask to watch bytes 3-5, the algorithm will watch the
entire doubleword (8 bytes). The newly default "modify" style means we
will silently ignore modifications to bytes outside the watched range.
I've temporarily skipped TestLargeWatchpoint.py for all targets. It was
only run on Darwin when using the in-tree debugserver, which was a proxy
for "debugserver supports MASK watchpoints". I'll be adding the
aforementioned feature flag from the stub and enabling full mask
watchpoints when a debugserver with that feature is enabled, and
re-enable this test.
I added a new TestUnalignedLargeWatchpoint.py which only has one test
but it's a great one, watching a 22-byte range that is unaligned and
requires four 8-byte watchpoints to cover.
I also added a unit test, WatchpointAlgorithmsTests, which has a number
of simple tests against WatchpointAlgorithms::PowerOf2Watchpoints. I
think there's interesting possible different approaches to how we cover
these; I note in the unit test that a user requesting a watch on address
0x12e0 of 120 bytes will be covered by two watchpoints today, a
128-bytes at 0x1280 and at 0x1300. But it could be done with a 16-byte
watchpoint at 0x12e0 and a 128-byte at 0x1300, which would have fewer
false positives/private stops. As we try refining this one, it's helpful
to have a collection of tests to make sure things don't regress.
I tested this on arm64 macOS, (genuine) x86_64 macOS, and AArch64
Ubuntu. I have not modifed the Windows process plugins yet, I might try
that as a standalone patch, I'd be making the change blind, but the
necessary changes (see ProcessGDBRemote::EnableWatchpoint) are pretty
small so it might be obvious enough that I can change it and see what
the Windows CI thinks.
There isn't yet a packet (or a qSupported feature query) for the gdb
remote serial protocol stub to communicate its watchpoint capabilities
to lldb. I'll be doing that in a patch right after this is landed,
having debugserver advertise its capability of AArch64 MASK watchpoints,
and have ProcessGDBRemote add eWatchpointHardwareArmMASK to
WatchpointAlgorithms so we can watch larger than 32-byte requests on
Darwin.
I haven't yet tackled WatchpointResource *sharing* by multiple
Watchpoints. This is all part of the goal, especially when we may be
watching a larger memory range than the user requested, if they then add
another watchpoint next to their first request, it may be covered by the
same WatchpointResource (hardware watchpoint register). Also one "read"
watchpoint and one "write" watchpoint on the same memory granule need to
be handled, making the WatchpointResource cover all requests.
As WatchpointResources aren't shared among multiple Watchpoints yet,
there's no handling of running the conditions/commands/etc on multiple
Watchpoints when their shared WatchpointResource is hit. The goal beyond
"large watchpoint" is to unify (much more) the Watchpoint and Breakpoint
behavior and commands. I have a feeling I may be slowly chipping away at
this for a while.
rdar://108234227
