forked from OSchip/llvm-project
206 lines
9.3 KiB
ReStructuredText
206 lines
9.3 KiB
ReStructuredText
Reproducers
|
|
===========
|
|
|
|
As unbelievable as it may sound, the debugger has bugs. These bugs might
|
|
manifest themselves as errors, missing results or even a crash. Quite often
|
|
these bugs don't reproduce in simple, isolated scenarios. The debugger deals
|
|
with a lot of moving parts and subtle differences can easily add up.
|
|
|
|
Reproducers in LLDB improve the experience for both the users encountering bugs
|
|
and the developers working on resolving them. The general idea consists of
|
|
*capturing* all the information necessary to later *replay* a debug session
|
|
while debugging the debugger.
|
|
|
|
.. contents::
|
|
:local:
|
|
|
|
Usage
|
|
-----
|
|
|
|
Reproducers are a generic concept in LLDB and are not inherently coupled with
|
|
the command line driver. The functionality can be used for anything that uses
|
|
the SB API and the driver is just one example. However, because it's probably
|
|
the most common way users interact with lldb, that's the workflow described in
|
|
this section.
|
|
|
|
Capture
|
|
```````
|
|
|
|
Until reproducer capture is enabled by default, you need to launch LLDB in
|
|
capture mode. For the command line driver, this means passing ``--capture``.
|
|
You cannot enable reproducer capture from within LLDB, as this would be too
|
|
late to capture initialization of the debugger.
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: bash
|
|
|
|
$ lldb --capture
|
|
|
|
In capture mode, LLDB will keep track of all the information it needs to replay
|
|
the current debug session. Most data is captured lazily to limit the impact on
|
|
performance. To create the reproducer, use the ``reproducer generate``
|
|
sub-command. It's always possible to check the status of the reproducers with
|
|
the ``reproducer status`` sub-command. Note that generating the reproducer
|
|
terminates the debug session.
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: none
|
|
|
|
(lldb) reproducer status
|
|
Reproducer is in capture mode.
|
|
(lldb) reproducer generate
|
|
Reproducer written to '/path/to/reproducer'
|
|
Please have a look at the directory to assess if you're willing to share the contained information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The resulting reproducer is a directory. It was a conscious decision to not
|
|
compress and archive it automatically. The reproducer can contain potentially
|
|
sensitive information like object and symbol files, their paths on disk, debug
|
|
information, memory excerpts of the inferior process, etc.
|
|
|
|
Replay
|
|
``````
|
|
|
|
It is strongly recommended to replay the reproducer locally to ensure it
|
|
actually reproduces the expected behavior. If the reproducer doesn't behave
|
|
correctly locally, it means there's a bug in the reproducer implementation that
|
|
should be addressed.
|
|
|
|
To replay a reproducer, simply pass its path to LLDB through the ``--replay``
|
|
flag. It is unnecessary to pass any other command line flags. The flags that
|
|
were passed to LLDB during capture are already part of the reproducer.
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: bash
|
|
|
|
$ lldb --replay /path/to/reproducer
|
|
|
|
|
|
During replay LLDB will behave similar to batch mode. The session should be
|
|
identical to the recorded debug session. The only expected differences are that
|
|
the binary being debugged doesn't actually run during replay. That means that
|
|
you won't see any of its side effects, like things being printed to the
|
|
terminal. Another expected difference is the behavior of the ``reproducer
|
|
generate`` command, which becomes a NOOP during replay.
|
|
|
|
Augmenting a Bug Report with a Reproducer
|
|
`````````````````````````````````````````
|
|
|
|
A reproducer can significantly improve a bug report, but it in itself is not
|
|
sufficient. Always describe the expected and unexpected behavior. Just like the
|
|
debugger can have bugs, the reproducer can have bugs too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Design
|
|
------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replay
|
|
``````
|
|
|
|
Reproducers support two replay modes. The main and most common mode is active
|
|
replay. It's called active, because it's LLDB that is driving replay by calling
|
|
the captured SB API functions one after each other. The second mode is passive
|
|
replay. In this mode, LLDB sits idle until an SB API function is called, for
|
|
example from Python, and then replays just this individual call.
|
|
|
|
Active Replay
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
No matter how a reproducer was captured, they can always be replayed with the
|
|
command line driver. When a reproducer is passed with the ``--replay`` flag, the
|
|
driver short-circuits and passes off control to the reproducer infrastructure,
|
|
effectively bypassing its normal operation. This works because the driver is
|
|
implemented using the SB API and is therefore nothing more than a sequence of
|
|
SB API calls.
|
|
|
|
Replay is driven by the ``Registry::Replay``. As long as there's data in the
|
|
buffer holding the API data, the next SB API function call is deserialized.
|
|
Once the function is known, the registry can retrieve its signature, and use
|
|
that to deserialize its arguments. The function can then be invoked, most
|
|
commonly through the synthesized default replayer, or potentially using a
|
|
custom defined replay function. This process continues, until more data is
|
|
available or a replay error is encountered.
|
|
|
|
During replay only a function's side effects matter. The result returned by the
|
|
replayed function is ignored because it cannot be observed beyond the driver.
|
|
This is sound, because anything that is passed into a subsequent API call will
|
|
have been serialized as an input argument. This also works for SB API objects
|
|
because the reproducers know about every object that has crossed the API
|
|
boundary, which is true by definition for object return values.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Passive Replay
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
Passive replay exists to support running the API test suite against a
|
|
reproducer. The API test suite is written in Python and tests the debugger by
|
|
calling into its API from Python. To make this work, the API must transparently
|
|
replay itself when called. This is what makes passive replay different from
|
|
driver replay, where it is lldb itself that's driving replay. For passive
|
|
replay, the driving factor is external.
|
|
|
|
In order to replay API calls, the reproducers need a way to intercept them.
|
|
Every API call is already instrumented with an ``LLDB_RECORD_*`` macro that
|
|
captures its input arguments. Furthermore, it also contains the necessary logic
|
|
to detect which calls cross the API boundary and should be intercepted. We were
|
|
able to reuse all of this to implement passive replay.
|
|
|
|
During passive replay is enabled, nothing happens until an SB API is called.
|
|
Inside that API function, the macro detects whether this call should be
|
|
replayed (i.e. crossed the API boundary). If the answer is yes, the next
|
|
function is deserialized from the SB API data and compared to the current
|
|
function. If the signature matches, we deserialize its input arguments and
|
|
reinvoke the current function with the deserialized arguments. We don't need to
|
|
do anything special to prevent us from recursively calling the replayed version
|
|
again, as the API boundary crossing logic knows that we're still behind the API
|
|
boundary when we re-invoked the current function.
|
|
|
|
Another big difference with driver replay is the return value. While this
|
|
didn't matter for driver replay, it's key for passive replay, because that's
|
|
what gets checked by the test suite. Luckily, the ``LLDB_RECORD_*`` macros
|
|
contained sufficient type information to derive the result type.
|
|
|
|
Testing
|
|
-------
|
|
|
|
Reproducers are tested in the following ways:
|
|
|
|
- Unit tests to cover the reproducer infrastructure. There are tests for the
|
|
provider, loader and for the reproducer instrumentation.
|
|
- Feature specific end-to-end test cases in the ``test/Shell/Reproducer``
|
|
directory. These tests serve as integration and regression tests for the
|
|
reproducers infrastructure, as well as doing some sanity checking for basic
|
|
debugger functionality.
|
|
- The API and shell tests can be run against a replayed reproducer. The
|
|
``check-lldb-reproducers`` target will run the API and shell test suite
|
|
twice: first running the test normally while capturing a reproducer and then
|
|
a second time using the replayed session as the test input. For the shell
|
|
tests this use a little shim (``lldb-repro``) that uses the arguments and
|
|
current working directory to transparently generate or replay a reproducer.
|
|
For the API tests an extra argument with the reproducer path is passed to
|
|
``dotest.py`` which initializes the debugger in the appropriate mode.
|
|
Certain tests do not fit this paradigm (for example test that check the
|
|
output of the binary being debugged) and are skipped by marking them as
|
|
unsupported by adding ``UNSUPPORTED: lldb-repro`` to the top of the shell
|
|
test or adding the ``skipIfReproducer`` decorator for the API tests.
|
|
|
|
Knows Issues
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
The reproducers are still a work in progress. Here's a non-exhaustive list of
|
|
outstanding work, limitations and known issues.
|
|
|
|
- The VFS cannot deal with more than one current working directory. Changing
|
|
the current working directory during the debug session will break relative
|
|
paths.
|
|
- Not all SB APIs are properly instrumented. We need customer serialization
|
|
for APIs that take buffers and lengths.
|
|
- We leak memory during replay because the reproducer doesn't capture the end
|
|
of an object's life time. We need to add instrumentation to the destructor
|
|
of SB API objects.
|
|
- The reproducer includes every file opened by LLDB. This is overkill. For
|
|
example we do not need to capture source files for code listings. There's
|
|
currently no way to say that some file shouldn't be included in the
|
|
reproducer.
|
|
- We do not yet automatically generate a reproducer on a crash. The reason is
|
|
that generating the reproducer is too expensive to do in a signal handler.
|
|
We should re-invoke lldb after a crash and do the heavy lifting.
|