On 1 December 2015 at 01:24, Vladimir Olovyannikov
<volov...@broadcom.com> wrote:
> Thank you Andrew, Ard.
>
> The problem was my wrong interpretation of the offset in DS-5 for the 
> ShellPkg,
> and therefore wrong entry point arithmetic.
>

OK, thanks for clearing that up.

Regards,
Ard.


>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: af...@apple.com [mailto:af...@apple.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 10:02 AM
>> To: Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>> Subject: Re: [edk2] Strange behavior of the DS-5 debugger on AARCH64 with
>> step-by-step debugging in uefi
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 23, 2015, at 11:31 PM, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 24 November 2015 at 00:38, Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> > <volov...@broadcom.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheu...@linaro.org]
>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 10:04 AM
>> >>> To: Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> >>> Cc: Cohen, Eugene; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: [edk2] Strange behavior of the DS-5 debugger on AARCH64
>> with
>> >>> step-by-step debugging in uefi
>> >>>
>> >>> On 10 November 2015 at 18:41, Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> >>> <volov...@broadcom.com> wrote:
>> >>>> Ard,
>> >>>> Many thanks for your help. It works.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Great! Thanks for reporting back.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>> From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheu...@linaro.org]
>> >>>> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 10:31 PM
>> >>>> To: Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> >>>> Cc: Cohen, Eugene; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [edk2] Strange behavior of the DS-5 debugger on AARCH64
>> >>> with step-by-step debugging in uefi
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 9 November 2015 at 19:01, Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> >>>> <volov...@broadcom.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>>> From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheu...@linaro.org]
>> >>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2015 10:52 PM
>> >>>>> To: Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> >>>>> Cc: Cohen, Eugene; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [edk2] Strange behavior of the DS-5 debugger on
>> AARCH64
>> >>> with step-by-step debugging in uefi
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 6 November 2015 at 21:32, Vladimir Olovyannikov
>> >>>>> <volov...@broadcom.com>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Hello Ard, Eugene,
>> >>>>>>> Thank you for explanation.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Ard, I tried the patch, but it cannot be applied to the latest 
>> >>>>>>> (pulled a
>> >>> minute ago, git-svn-id:
>> >>> https://svn.code.sf.net/p/edk2/code/trunk/edk2@18732 6f19259b-
>> 4bc3-
>> >>> 4df7-8a09-765794883524)
>> >>>>>>> tree: all 3 hunks failed. Which commit should I be based on to apply
>> the
>> >>> patch?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Anyway I found the lines manually and changed them. However,
>> when
>> >>> I try to
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> source /uefi/ArmPlatformPkg/Scripts/Ds5/cmd_load_symbols.py -f
>> >>> (0x85000000,0x00280000) -m (0x80000000,0x40000000) -a
>> >>>>>>> I am getting
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> ERROR(?): ValueError: need more than 1 value to unpack
>> >>>>>>>  File " /uefi/ArmPlatformPkg/Scripts/Ds5/cmd_load_symbols.py",
>> line
>> >>> 94, in <module>>
>> >>>>>>>    armplatform_debugger.load_all_symbols()
>> >>>>>>> ERROR(CMD656):
>> >>>>>>> # in
>> /uefi/BroadcomPlatformPkg/NS2Pkg/Scripts/armpkg_syms.ds:2
>> >>> while executing: source
>> >>> /uefi/ArmPlatformPkg/Scripts/Ds5/cmd_load_symbols.py -f
>> >>> (0x85000000,0x00280000) -m (0x80000000,0x40000000) -a
>> >>>>>>> ! The script
>> /uefi/ArmPlatformPkg/Scripts/Ds5/cmd_load_symbols.py
>> >>> failed to complete due to an error during execution of the script
>> >>>>>>>
>> >> [...]
>> >> Ard, I got a pretty much the same issue when I tried to do some
>> debugging in the ShellPkg.
>> >> Except Shell I can perfectly debug everything.
>> >>
>> >> 1. source / uefi/ArmPlatformPkg/Scripts/Ds5/cmd_load_symbols.py -f
>> (0x85000000,0x00280000) -m (0x80000000,0x40000000) -a
>> >>     loads symbols fine, but does not recognize any module matching the
>> current PC if stopped in the shell.
>> >> 2. Loading symbols with "add-symbol-file
>> /uefi/Build/NS2Pkg/DEBUG_GCC49/AARCH64/ShellPkg/Application/Shell/Sh
>> ell/DEBUG/Shell.dll 0xB6926000"
>> >>    "recognizes" modules (wrong ones though) but the source code does
>> not match disassembly.
>> >>
>> >> So with Shell debug using DS-5 the code does not match the source.
>> >> Is there a special linker setting I am missing or a technique?
>> >> I am using the latest UEFI code from
>> >> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2.git
>> >>
>> >
>> > I am sorry, but since I don't have access to DS-5, I am not sure how
>> > to debug this.
>> >
>> > Is there any way for you to figure how much the offset is between the
>> > current and the correct location? I.e., by looking at the ELF asm dump
>> > and the instructions around the PC? Something in the order of 0x260
>> > perhaps?
>> >
>>
>> The map file in the build output directory is useful for tracking down these
>> kind of issues.
>>
>> Issues like this usually relate to the fact that PE/COFF images load the
>> PE/COFF header into memory when the code is loaded, while ELF (and Mach-
>> O) do not do this. This means you have to shift the link address from 0 to 
>> the
>> size of the PE/COFF header (0x260 is one possible size of the PE/COFF
>> header). Basically it is part of the ELF to PE/COFF conversion magic. Maybe
>> the ELF to PE/COFF conversion tool and the debugger script our out of sync?
>>
>> The other thing to look out for is TE (Tiano Executable) images. They have a
>> stripped down version of a PE/COFF header to save space, and they are
>> mostly used for PEI modules that run from FLASH. You have to add a negative
>> adjustment to get the symbols loaded correctly.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Andrew Fish
>>
>> > --
>> > Ard.
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > edk2-devel mailing list
>> > edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>> > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
>
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

Reply via email to