Re: GDB 13.2: breakpoint at wrong line after unrelated change

On Mon, 2024-03-11 at 15:14 -0400, Simon Marchi wrote:
> > I have noticed that if I only include the templated function
> > definition but don't call it, then the problem doesn't happen.
> 
> When you say that, does it mean that you just define the templated
> function, or do you manually instantiate it?  In other words, does it
> cause any code to be generated?

If I just define the templated function I don't see the issue.  If I
invoke the templated function, I get the problem.

FYI I'm switching to the fmt library (if you're familiar with that) and
the templated function invokes it; it's something like this:

    void criticalErrorV(fmt::string_view fmt, const char *file, int line,
                        fmt::format_args args);

    template <typename... Args>
    void criticalError(fmt::format_string<Args...> fmt,
                       const char* file, int line, Args &&...args)
    {
        criticalErrorV(fmt, file, line, fmt::make_format_args(args...));
    }

If I never call criticalError() then it works fine (or in my previous
implementation, which used printf-style calls with stdarg, it worked
fine as well).

If I have some invocation of criticalError() somewhere in the
translation unit, I get this problem.  I haven't checked moving it
around to see if it needs to be invoked before/after the "problem"
method in the TU to get this behavior.

> I don't really have an idea of what's happening, but you could try
> showing what the "disas" command shows after hitting the breakpoint
> in both cases (the `=>` should show where you are stopped, so where
> the breakpoint was set).

Good idea; here's what I get for the correct behavior:

   0x000000000053209c <+0>:     push   %rbp
   0x000000000053209d <+1>:     mov    %rsp,%rbp
   0x00000000005320a0 <+4>:     lea    -0x10(%rsp),%rsp
   0x00000000005320a5 <+9>:     mov    %rdi,-0x8(%rbp)
   0x00000000005320a9 <+13>:    mov    %rsi,-0x10(%rbp)
=> 0x00000000005320ad <+17>:    mov    -0x10(%rbp),%rax
   0x00000000005320b1 <+21>:    mov    %rax,%rsi
   0x00000000005320b4 <+24>:    lea    0x17e9a9(%rip),%rax        # 0x6b0a64
   0x00000000005320bb <+31>:    mov    %rax,%rdi
   0x00000000005320be <+34>:    mov    $0x0,%eax
   0x00000000005320c3 <+39>:    call   0x52bc00 <printf@plt>
   0x00000000005320c8 <+44>:    nop
   0x00000000005320c9 <+45>:    mov    %rbp,%rsp
   0x00000000005320cc <+48>:    pop    %rbp
   0x00000000005320cd <+49>:    ret

Here's what I get for the incorrect behavior:

=> 0x00000000005320ee <+0>:     push   %rbp
   0x00000000005320ef <+1>:     mov    %rsp,%rbp
   0x00000000005320f2 <+4>:     lea    -0x10(%rsp),%rsp
   0x00000000005320f7 <+9>:     mov    %rdi,-0x8(%rbp)
   0x00000000005320fb <+13>:    mov    %rsi,-0x10(%rbp)
   0x00000000005320ff <+17>:    mov    -0x10(%rbp),%rax
   0x0000000000532103 <+21>:    mov    %rax,%rsi
   0x0000000000532106 <+24>:    lea    0x17e9d6(%rip),%rax        # 0x6b0ae3
   0x000000000053210d <+31>:    mov    %rax,%rdi
   0x0000000000532110 <+34>:    mov    $0x0,%eax
   0x0000000000532115 <+39>:    call   0x52bc00 <printf@plt>
   0x000000000053211a <+44>:    nop
   0x000000000053211b <+45>:    mov    %rbp,%rsp
   0x000000000053211e <+48>:    pop    %rbp
   0x000000000053211f <+49>:    ret

It seems to have given up and just picked the first instruction :)

Here's the compile line args (removed extraneous stuff like warnings
and preprocessor options):

  g++ -std=gnu++20 -ggdb3 -fPIC -march=haswell -mtune=intel \
    -fno-omit-frame-pointer -O0 -pthread \
    -o TestClass.o -c TestClass.cpp