binutils-gdb/gdb/f-array-walker.h

303 lines
11 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/* Copyright (C) 2020-2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
This file is part of GDB.
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. */
/* Support classes to wrap up the process of iterating over a
multi-dimensional Fortran array. */
#ifndef F_ARRAY_WALKER_H
#define F_ARRAY_WALKER_H
#include "defs.h"
#include "gdbtypes.h"
#include "f-lang.h"
/* Class for calculating the byte offset for elements within a single
dimension of a Fortran array. */
class fortran_array_offset_calculator
{
public:
/* Create a new offset calculator for TYPE, which is either an array or a
string. */
explicit fortran_array_offset_calculator (struct type *type)
{
/* Validate the type. */
type = check_typedef (type);
if (type->code () != TYPE_CODE_ARRAY
&& (type->code () != TYPE_CODE_STRING))
error (_("can only compute offsets for arrays and strings"));
/* Get the range, and extract the bounds. */
struct type *range_type = type->index_type ();
if (!get_discrete_bounds (range_type, &m_lowerbound, &m_upperbound))
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
error ("unable to read array bounds");
/* Figure out the stride for this array. */
struct type *elt_type = check_typedef (TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (type));
m_stride = type->index_type ()->bounds ()->bit_stride ();
if (m_stride == 0)
m_stride = type_length_units (elt_type);
else
{
int unit_size
= gdbarch_addressable_memory_unit_size (elt_type->arch ());
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
m_stride /= (unit_size * 8);
}
};
/* Get the byte offset for element INDEX within the type we are working
on. There is no bounds checking done on INDEX. If the stride is
negative then we still assume that the base address (for the array
object) points to the element with the lowest memory address, we then
calculate an offset assuming that index 0 will be the element at the
highest address, index 1 the next highest, and so on. This is not
quite how Fortran works in reality; in reality the base address of
the object would point at the element with the highest address, and
we would index backwards from there in the "normal" way, however,
GDB's current value contents model doesn't support having the base
address be near to the end of the value contents, so we currently
adjust the base address of Fortran arrays with negative strides so
their base address points at the lowest memory address. This code
here is part of working around this weirdness. */
LONGEST index_offset (LONGEST index)
{
LONGEST offset;
if (m_stride < 0)
offset = std::abs (m_stride) * (m_upperbound - index);
else
offset = std::abs (m_stride) * (index - m_lowerbound);
return offset;
}
private:
/* The stride for the type we are working with. */
LONGEST m_stride;
/* The upper bound for the type we are working with. */
LONGEST m_upperbound;
/* The lower bound for the type we are working with. */
LONGEST m_lowerbound;
};
/* A base class used by fortran_array_walker. There's no virtual methods
here, sub-classes should just override the functions they want in order
to specialise the behaviour to their needs. The functionality
provided in these default implementations will visit every array
element, but do nothing for each element. */
struct fortran_array_walker_base_impl
{
/* Called when iterating between the lower and upper bounds of each
dimension of the array. Return true if GDB should continue iterating,
otherwise, return false.
SHOULD_CONTINUE indicates if GDB is going to stop anyway, and should
be taken into consideration when deciding what to return. If
SHOULD_CONTINUE is false then this function must also return false,
the function is still called though in case extra work needs to be
done as part of the stopping process. */
bool continue_walking (bool should_continue)
{ return should_continue; }
/* Called when GDB starts iterating over a dimension of the array. The
argument INDEX_TYPE is the type of the index used to address elements
in the dimension, NELTS holds the number of the elements there, and
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
INNER_P is true for the inner most dimension (the dimension containing
the actual elements of the array), and false for more outer dimensions.
For a concrete example of how this function is called see the comment
on process_element below. */
void start_dimension (struct type *index_type, LONGEST nelts, bool inner_p)
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
{ /* Nothing. */ }
/* Called when GDB finishes iterating over a dimension of the array. The
argument INNER_P is true for the inner most dimension (the dimension
containing the actual elements of the array), and false for more outer
dimensions. LAST_P is true for the last call at a particular
dimension. For a concrete example of how this function is called
see the comment on process_element below. */
void finish_dimension (bool inner_p, bool last_p)
{ /* Nothing. */ }
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
/* Called when processing dimensions of the array other than the
innermost one. WALK_1 is the walker to normally call, ELT_TYPE is
the type of the element being extracted, and ELT_OFF is the offset
of the element from the start of array being walked. INDEX is the
value of the index the current element is at in the upper dimension.
Finally LAST_P is true only when this is the last element that will
be processed in this dimension. */
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
void process_dimension (gdb::function_view<void (struct type *,
int, bool)> walk_1,
struct type *elt_type, LONGEST elt_off,
LONGEST index, bool last_p)
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
{
walk_1 (elt_type, elt_off, last_p);
}
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
/* Called when processing the inner most dimension of the array, for
every element in the array. ELT_TYPE is the type of the element being
extracted, and ELT_OFF is the offset of the element from the start of
array being walked. INDEX is the value of the index the current
element is at in the upper dimension. Finally LAST_P is true only
when this is the last element that will be processed in this dimension.
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
Given this two dimensional array ((1, 2) (3, 4) (5, 6)), the calls to
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
start_dimension, process_element, and finish_dimension look like this:
start_dimension (INDEX_TYPE, 3, false);
start_dimension (INDEX_TYPE, 2, true);
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
process_element (TYPE, OFFSET, false);
process_element (TYPE, OFFSET, true);
finish_dimension (true, false);
start_dimension (INDEX_TYPE, 2, true);
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
process_element (TYPE, OFFSET, false);
process_element (TYPE, OFFSET, true);
finish_dimension (true, true);
start_dimension (INDEX_TYPE, 2, true);
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
process_element (TYPE, OFFSET, false);
process_element (TYPE, OFFSET, true);
finish_dimension (true, true);
finish_dimension (false, true); */
void process_element (struct type *elt_type, LONGEST elt_off,
LONGEST index, bool last_p)
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
{ /* Nothing. */ }
};
/* A class to wrap up the process of iterating over a multi-dimensional
Fortran array. IMPL is used to specialise what happens as we walk over
the array. See class FORTRAN_ARRAY_WALKER_BASE_IMPL (above) for the
methods than can be used to customise the array walk. */
template<typename Impl>
class fortran_array_walker
{
/* Ensure that Impl is derived from the required base class. This just
ensures that all of the required API methods are available and have a
sensible default implementation. */
gdb_static_assert ((std::is_base_of<fortran_array_walker_base_impl,Impl>::value));
public:
/* Create a new array walker. TYPE is the type of the array being walked
over, and ADDRESS is the base address for the object of TYPE in
memory. All other arguments are forwarded to the constructor of the
template parameter class IMPL. */
template <typename ...Args>
fortran_array_walker (struct type *type, CORE_ADDR address,
Args... args)
: m_type (type),
m_address (address),
m_impl (type, address, args...),
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
m_ndimensions (calc_f77_array_dims (m_type)),
m_nss (0)
{ /* Nothing. */ }
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
/* Walk the array. */
void
walk ()
{
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
walk_1 (m_type, 0, false);
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
}
private:
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
/* The core of the array walking algorithm. TYPE is the type of
the current dimension being processed and OFFSET is the offset
(in bytes) for the start of this dimension. */
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
void
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
walk_1 (struct type *type, int offset, bool last_p)
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
{
/* Extract the range, and get lower and upper bounds. */
struct type *range_type = check_typedef (type)->index_type ();
LONGEST lowerbound, upperbound;
if (!get_discrete_bounds (range_type, &lowerbound, &upperbound))
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
error ("failed to get range bounds");
/* CALC is used to calculate the offsets for each element in this
dimension. */
fortran_array_offset_calculator calc (type);
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
m_nss++;
gdb_assert (range_type->code () == TYPE_CODE_RANGE);
m_impl.start_dimension (TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (range_type),
upperbound - lowerbound + 1,
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
m_nss == m_ndimensions);
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
if (m_nss != m_ndimensions)
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
{
struct type *subarray_type = TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (check_typedef (type));
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
/* For dimensions other than the inner most, walk each element and
recurse while peeling off one more dimension of the array. */
for (LONGEST i = lowerbound;
m_impl.continue_walking (i < upperbound + 1);
i++)
{
/* Use the index and the stride to work out a new offset. */
LONGEST new_offset = offset + calc.index_offset (i);
/* Now print the lower dimension. */
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
m_impl.process_dimension
([this] (struct type *w_type, int w_offset, bool w_last_p) -> void
{
this->walk_1 (w_type, w_offset, w_last_p);
},
subarray_type, new_offset, i, i == upperbound);
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
}
}
else
{
struct type *elt_type = check_typedef (TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (type));
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
/* For the inner most dimension of the array, process each element
within this dimension. */
for (LONGEST i = lowerbound;
m_impl.continue_walking (i < upperbound + 1);
i++)
{
LONGEST elt_off = offset + calc.index_offset (i);
if (is_dynamic_type (elt_type))
{
CORE_ADDR e_address = m_address + elt_off;
elt_type = resolve_dynamic_type (elt_type, {}, e_address);
}
m_impl.process_element (elt_type, elt_off, i, i == upperbound);
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
}
}
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
m_impl.finish_dimension (m_nss == m_ndimensions, last_p || m_nss == 1);
m_nss--;
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
}
/* The array type being processed. */
struct type *m_type;
/* The address in target memory for the object of M_TYPE being
processed. This is required in order to resolve dynamic types. */
CORE_ADDR m_address;
/* An instance of the template specialisation class. */
Impl m_impl;
/* The total number of dimensions in M_TYPE. */
int m_ndimensions;
Respect `set print repeats' with Fortran arrays Implement `set print repeats' handling for Fortran arrays. Currently the setting is ignored and always treated as if no limit was set. Unlike the generic array walker implemented decades ago the Fortran one is a proper C++ class. Rather than trying to mimic the old walker then, which turned out a bit of a challenge where interacting with the `set print elements' setting, write it entirely from scratch, by adding an extra specialization handler method for processing dimensions other than the innermost one and letting the specialization class call the `walk_1' method from the handler as it sees fit. This way repeats can be tracked and the next inner dimension recursed into as a need arises only, or unconditionally in the base class. Keep track of the dimension number being handled in the class rather as a parameter to the walker so that it does not have to be passed across by the specialization class. Use per-dimension element count tracking, needed to terminate processing early when the limit set by `set print elements' is hit. This requires extra care too where the limit triggers exactly where another element that is a subarray begins. In that case rather than recursing we need to terminate processing or lone `(...)' would be printed. Additionally if the skipped element is the last one in the current dimension we need to print `...' by hand, because `continue_walking' won't print it at the upper level, because it can see the last element has already been taken care of. Preserve the existing semantics of `set print elements' where the total count of the elements handled is matched against the trigger level which is unlike with the C/C++ array printer where the per-dimension element count is used instead. Output now looks like: (gdb) set print repeats 4 (gdb) print array_2d $1 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) <repeats 5 times>) (gdb) set print elements 12 (gdb) print array_2d $2 = ((2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, <repeats 5 times>) (2, 2, ...) ...) (gdb) for a 5 by 5 array filled with the value of 2. Amend existing test cases accordingly that rely on the current incorrect behavior and explicitly request that there be no limit for printing repeated elements there. Add suitable test cases as well covering sliced arrays in particular. Co-Authored-By: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
2022-01-20 05:55:10 +08:00
/* The current dimension number being processed. */
int m_nss;
gdb/fortran: Add support for Fortran array slices at the GDB prompt This commit brings array slice support to GDB. WARNING: This patch contains a rather big hack which is limited to Fortran arrays, this can be seen in gdbtypes.c and f-lang.c. More details on this below. This patch rewrites two areas of GDB's Fortran support, the code to extract an array slice, and the code to print an array. After this commit a user can, from the GDB prompt, ask for a slice of a Fortran array and should get the correct result back. Slices can (optionally) have the lower bound, upper bound, and a stride specified. Slices can also have a negative stride. Fortran has the concept of repacking array slices. Within a compiled Fortran program if a user passes a non-contiguous array slice to a function then the compiler may have to repack the slice, this involves copying the elements of the slice to a new area of memory before the call, and copying the elements back to the original array after the call. Whether repacking occurs will depend on which version of Fortran is being used, and what type of function is being called. This commit adds support for both packed, and unpacked array slicing, with the default being unpacked. With an unpacked array slice, when the user asks for a slice of an array GDB creates a new type that accurately describes where the elements of the slice can be found within the original array, a value of this type is then returned to the user. The address of an element within the slice will be equal to the address of an element within the original array. A user can choose to select packed array slices instead using: (gdb) set fortran repack-array-slices on|off (gdb) show fortran repack-array-slices With packed array slices GDB creates a new type that reflects how the elements of the slice would look if they were laid out in contiguous memory, allocates a value of this type, and then fetches the elements from the original array and places then into the contents buffer of the new value. One benefit of using packed slices over unpacked slices is the memory usage, taking a small slice of N elements from a large array will require (in GDB) N * ELEMENT_SIZE bytes of memory, while an unpacked array will also include all of the "padding" between the non-contiguous elements. There are new tests added that highlight this difference. There is also a new debugging flag added with this commit that introduces these commands: (gdb) set debug fortran-array-slicing on|off (gdb) show debug fortran-array-slicing This prints information about how the array slices are being built. As both the repacking, and the array printing requires GDB to walk through a multi-dimensional Fortran array visiting each element, this commit adds the file f-array-walk.h, which introduces some infrastructure to support this process. This means the array printing code in f-valprint.c is significantly reduced. The only slight issue with this commit is the "rather big hack" that I mentioned above. This hack allows us to handle one specific case, array slices with negative strides. This is something that I don't believe the current GDB value contents model will allow us to correctly handle, and rather than rewrite the value contents code right now, I'm hoping to slip this hack in as a work around. The problem is that, as I see it, the current value contents model assumes that an object base address will be the lowest address within that object, and that the contents of the object start at this base address and occupy the TYPE_LENGTH bytes after that. ( We do have the embedded_offset, which is used for C++ sub-classes, such that an object can start at some offset from the content buffer, however, the assumption that the object then occupies the next TYPE_LENGTH bytes is still true within GDB. ) The problem is that Fortran arrays with a negative stride don't follow this pattern. In this case the base address of the object points to the element with the highest address, the contents of the array then start at some offset _before_ the base address, and proceed for one element _past_ the base address. As the stride for such an array would be negative then, in theory the TYPE_LENGTH for this type would also be negative. However, in many places a value in GDB will degrade to a pointer + length, and the length almost always comes from the TYPE_LENGTH. It is my belief that in order to correctly model this case the value content handling of GDB will need to be reworked to split apart the value's content buffer (which is a block of memory with a length), and the object's in memory base address and length, which could be negative. Things are further complicated because arrays with negative strides like this are always dynamic types. When a value has a dynamic type and its base address needs resolving we actually store the address of the object within the resolved dynamic type, not within the value object itself. In short I don't currently see an easy path to cleanly support this situation within GDB. And so I believe that leaves two options, either add a work around, or catch cases where the user tries to make use of a negative stride, or access an array with a negative stride, and throw an error. This patch currently goes with adding a work around, which is that when we resolve a dynamic Fortran array type, if the stride is negative, then we adjust the base address to point to the lowest address required by the array. The printing and slicing code is aware of this adjustment and will correctly slice and print Fortran arrays. Where this hack will show through to the user is if they ask for the address of an array in their program with a negative array stride, the address they get from GDB will not match the address that would be computed within the Fortran program. gdb/ChangeLog: * Makefile.in (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add f-array-walker.h. * NEWS: Mention new options. * f-array-walker.h: New file. * f-lang.c: Include 'gdbcmd.h' and 'f-array-walker.h'. (repack_array_slices): New static global. (show_repack_array_slices): New function. (fortran_array_slicing_debug): New static global. (show_fortran_array_slicing_debug): New function. (value_f90_subarray): Delete. (skip_undetermined_arglist): Delete. (class fortran_array_repacker_base_impl): New class. (class fortran_lazy_array_repacker_impl): New class. (class fortran_array_repacker_impl): New class. (fortran_value_subarray): Complete rewrite. (set_fortran_list): New static global. (show_fortran_list): Likewise. (_initialize_f_language): Register new commands. (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): New function. * f-lang.h (fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack): Declare. * f-valprint.c: Include 'f-array-walker.h'. (class fortran_array_printer_impl): New class. (f77_print_array_1): Delete. (f77_print_array): Delete. (fortran_print_array): New. (f_value_print_inner): Update to call fortran_print_array. * gdbtypes.c: Include 'f-lang.h'. (resolve_dynamic_type_internal): Call fortran_adjust_dynamic_array_base_address_hack. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-bad.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.exp: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices-sub-slices.f90: New file. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.exp: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/array-slices.f90: Rewrite tests. * gdb.fortran/vla-sizeof.exp: Correct expected results. gdb/doc/ChangeLog: * gdb.texinfo (Debugging Output): Document 'set/show debug fortran-array-slicing'. (Special Fortran Commands): Document 'set/show fortran repack-array-slices'.
2020-10-08 23:45:59 +08:00
};
#endif /* F_ARRAY_WALKER_H */