-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 623
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add support for disassembly view #1801
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add support for disassembly view #1801
Conversation
This contribution updates the llvm patch, but it would be probably better to have an internal fork of the llvm-project. Especially considering that new patches will be added (for instance, the one for watchpoints). A readable version of the patch can be found in my fork https://github.com/eloparco/llvm-project/tree/eloparco/disassembly-view. |
Can we propose this change to LLVM's upstream instead? I don't think it's WASM specific, and we'd also get a solid review from LLVM maintainers. Ideal path would be to:
|
Hi @eloparco, I tried your branch. It's very cool that I could see my source code in the wat form. I tried a standard hello world program, and everything is working fine: But then I tried a more complex one, calling a self-defined function. And the result is a little strange: Could you please tell me how is your test result for such a scenario? |
Hi @TianlongLiang, happy to know that you tried it :) Could you share the program you're using so that I can reproduce it? |
Of course! The first program that works fine: #include <stdio.h>
int main() {
printf("Hello World\n");
return 0;
} The second program that has some problem: #include <stdio.h>
void myfunc(int iteration) { printf("iteration %d end\n", iteration); }
int main() {
printf("Hello World\n");
for (size_t i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
myfunc(i);
}
return 0;
} |
Our release for 1.1.2 is coming soon. Maybe you could try to reproduce it more easily (and efficiently) after this release. Here is some information you may find helpful:
|
Hi @TianlongLiang, I managed to reproduce. Basically it seems like this happens when lldb is not able to detect the start and end of the stack frame (and I'm using that functionality in my changes in the adapter). It's not clear to me when that happens, I'll open an issue.
Instead, that works for me: #include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int sum(int a, int b) { return a + b; }
int main() {
printf("Hello world!\n");
int a = 1;
int b = 2;
int c = sum(a, b);
printf("sum: %d", c);
return 0;
} In fact, from lldb I get
|
Hi, @eloparco, I tested my two example programs again, and both get this similar result (this is screenshot of my second program, however, the first program display similar result): And use lldb directly on my first program, getting this result: ❯ ~/TL/wasm-micro-runtime/core/deps/llvm/build-lldb/bin/lldb
(lldb) process connect -p wasm connect://127.0.0.1:1234
(lldb) Process 1 stopped
* thread #1, name = 'nobody', stop reason = trace
frame #0: 0x400000000000005a main.wasm`main at main.c:5
2
3 // void myfunc(int iteration) { printf("iteration %d end\n", iteration); }
4
-> 5 int main() {
6
7 printf("Hello World\n");
8
disa
main.wasm`main:
0x4000000000000057 <+0>: nop
0x4000000000000058 <+1>: rethrow 127 ; to caller
-> 0x400000000000005a <+3>: global.get 0
0x4000000000000060 <+9>: local.set 0
0x4000000000000062 <+11>: i32.const 16
0x4000000000000064 <+13>: local.set 1
0x4000000000000066 <+15>: local.get 0
0x4000000000000068 <+17>: local.get 1
0x400000000000006a <+19>: i32.sub
0x400000000000006b <+20>: local.set 2
0x400000000000006d <+22>: local.get 2
0x400000000000006f <+24>: global.set 0
0x4000000000000075 <+30>: i32.const 0
0x4000000000000077 <+32>: local.set 3
0x4000000000000079 <+34>: local.get 2
0x400000000000007b <+36>: local.get 3
0x400000000000007d <+38>: i32.store 12
0x4000000000000080 <+41>: i32.const 1024
0x4000000000000086 <+47>: local.set 4
0x4000000000000088 <+49>: i32.const 0
0x400000000000008a <+51>: local.set 5
0x400000000000008c <+53>: local.get 4
0x400000000000008e <+55>: local.get 5
0x4000000000000090 <+57>: call 0
0x4000000000000096 <+63>: drop
0x4000000000000097 <+64>: i32.const 0
0x4000000000000099 <+66>: local.set 6
0x400000000000009b <+68>: i32.const 16
0x400000000000009d <+70>: local.set 7
0x400000000000009f <+72>: local.get 2
0x40000000000000a1 <+74>: local.get 7
0x40000000000000a3 <+76>: i32.add
0x40000000000000a4 <+77>: local.set 8
0x40000000000000a6 <+79>: local.get 8
0x40000000000000a8 <+81>: global.set 0
0x40000000000000ae <+87>: local.get 6
0x40000000000000b0 <+89>: return
0x40000000000000b1 <+90>: end I mean, this seems fine to me, I don't why it is not working in VS Code. Could you please share your running result in VS Code? I am worried that maybe I misconfigure something |
Hi @TianlongLiang, that's what I see on VS Code And that's what I get from command line: $ wasm-micro-runtime/core/deps/llvm/build-lldb/bin/lldb
Platform: remote-linux
Connected: no
Process 1 stopped
* thread #1, name = 'nobody', stop reason = trace
frame #0: 0x4000000000001069 test.wasm
-> 0x4000000000001069: block
0x400000000000106b: i32.const 0
0x400000000000106d: i32.load 3680
0x4000000000001074: br_if 0 ; 0: down to label0
(lldb) b main
Breakpoint 1: where = test.wasm`main + 41 at test.c:7:3, address = 0x400000000000112f
(lldb) c
Process 1 resuming
Process 1 stopped
* thread #1, name = 'nobody', stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
frame #0: 0x400000000000112f test.wasm`main at test.c:7:3
4
5 int main() {
6
-> 7 printf("Hello World\n");
8
9 for (size_t i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
10 myfunc(i);
(lldb) dis
test.wasm`main:
0x4000000000001106 <+0>: nop
0x4000000000001107 <+1>:
0x4000000000001108 <+2>: i64.div_s
0x4000000000001109 <+3>: global.get 0
0x400000000000110f <+9>: local.set 0
0x4000000000001111 <+11>: i32.const 16
0x4000000000001113 <+13>: local.set 1
0x4000000000001115 <+15>: local.get 0
0x4000000000001117 <+17>: local.get 1
0x4000000000001119 <+19>: i32.sub
0x400000000000111a <+20>: local.set 2
0x400000000000111c <+22>: local.get 2
0x400000000000111e <+24>: global.set 0
0x4000000000001124 <+30>: i32.const 0
0x4000000000001126 <+32>: local.set 3
0x4000000000001128 <+34>: local.get 2
0x400000000000112a <+36>: local.get 3
0x400000000000112c <+38>: i32.store 12
-> 0x400000000000112f <+41>: i32.const 1096
0x4000000000001135 <+47>: local.set 4
0x4000000000001137 <+49>: i32.const 0
0x4000000000001139 <+51>: local.set 5
0x400000000000113b <+53>: local.get 4
0x400000000000113d <+55>: local.get 5
0x400000000000113f <+57>: call 99
0x4000000000001145 <+63>: drop
0x4000000000001146 <+64>: i32.const 0
0x4000000000001148 <+66>: local.set 6
0x400000000000114a <+68>: local.get 2
0x400000000000114c <+70>: local.get 6
0x400000000000114e <+72>: i32.store 8
0x4000000000001151 <+75>: block
0x4000000000001153 <+77>: loop ; label1:
0x4000000000001155 <+79>: local.get 2
0x4000000000001157 <+81>: i32.load 8
0x400000000000115a <+84>: local.set 7
0x400000000000115c <+86>: i32.const 5
0x400000000000115e <+88>: local.set 8
0x4000000000001160 <+90>: local.get 7
0x4000000000001162 <+92>: local.set 9
0x4000000000001164 <+94>: local.get 8
0x4000000000001166 <+96>: local.set 10
0x4000000000001168 <+98>: local.get 9
0x400000000000116a <+100>: local.get 10
0x400000000000116c <+102>: i32.lt_u
0x400000000000116d <+103>: local.set 11
0x400000000000116f <+105>: i32.const 1
0x4000000000001171 <+107>: local.set 12
0x4000000000001173 <+109>: local.get 11
0x4000000000001175 <+111>: local.get 12
0x4000000000001177 <+113>: i32.and
0x4000000000001178 <+114>: local.set 13
0x400000000000117a <+116>: local.get 13
0x400000000000117c <+118>: i32.eqz
0x400000000000117d <+119>: br_if 1 ; 1: down to label0
0x400000000000117f <+121>: local.get 2
0x4000000000001181 <+123>: i32.load 8
0x4000000000001184 <+126>: local.set 14
0x4000000000001186 <+128>: local.get 14
0x4000000000001188 <+130>: call 47
0x400000000000118e <+136>: local.get 2
0x4000000000001190 <+138>: i32.load 8
0x4000000000001193 <+141>: local.set 15
0x4000000000001195 <+143>: i32.const 1
0x4000000000001197 <+145>: local.set 16
0x4000000000001199 <+147>: local.get 15
0x400000000000119b <+149>: local.get 16
0x400000000000119d <+151>: i32.add
0x400000000000119e <+152>: local.set 17
0x40000000000011a0 <+154>: local.get 2
0x40000000000011a2 <+156>: local.get 17
0x40000000000011a4 <+158>: i32.store 8
0x40000000000011a7 <+161>: br 0 ; 0: up to label1
0x40000000000011a9 <+163>: end
0x40000000000011aa <+164>: end
0x40000000000011ab <+165>: i32.const 0
0x40000000000011ad <+167>: local.set 18
0x40000000000011af <+169>: i32.const 16
0x40000000000011b1 <+171>: local.set 19
0x40000000000011b3 <+173>: local.get 2
0x40000000000011b5 <+175>: local.get 19
0x40000000000011b7 <+177>: i32.add
0x40000000000011b8 <+178>: local.set 20
0x40000000000011ba <+180>: local.get 20
0x40000000000011bc <+182>: global.set 0
0x40000000000011c2 <+188>: local.get 18
0x40000000000011c4 <+190>: return
0x40000000000011c5 <+191>: end As you can see, address |
Thanks! I suspect I encounter this bug either because I am using Ubuntu 22.04 or because I am using LLVM 13.0.1 to patch, which may differ from what you are using. Could you please tell me which OS you are using and which version of LLVM you are using? |
My machine is a MacOS M1. I don't use the docker images, I run the For the llvm version, I'm using I didn't manage to reproduce the issue. |
Hi, I tested it on my physical machine (macOS Intel chip). I am still getting a similar result (unreachable, like in my earlier screenshot). I started to think maybe I had misconfigured something..... Maybe next week, I will ask for my colleague's help to take a second look at my result and try to figure out where it went wrong. But I guess that's enough work for this week. Again, I really want to thank you for the work in implementing this awesome feature and for always responding quickly to any updates. Christmas is around the corner, and New Year is near. Wishing you a very safe and happy holiday season. |
Thank you for the feedback and happy new year! I wasn't able to reproduce and in principle it shouldn't be machine dependent (since it's disassembled to wasm). Let me know if you find anything. |
Yeah, I think it shouldn't be machine-dependent, either. Now that I have given it more thought, I think maybe it's because the version of VS Code I am using. I recalled that I had encountered a bug for the Azure extension before, and when I downgraded the VS Code extension, the bug went away. And since I could get the correct behavior using lldb directly, and you could get the correct behavior using VS Code, I guess it could be my VS Code. Is it Okay to share your VS Code version? |
Sure, I'm using
You can add this line
in |
Hi, I tested 1.74.1 VS Code and still had the problem I encountered before...... -> 0x400000000000110e <+41>: i32.const 1217 And mine is from 0x400...00bd 0x40000000000000bd unreachable Is it normal that we have different base addresses? The wasm file should be the same, shouldn't the base address be the same too? |
I'll try merging my changes upstream first (https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358) and then I'll give it another look. |
When using the WAMR VSCode extension, there is no support for the disassembly view.
This PR add support for it, implementing the
DisassembleRequest
as specified in the DAP protocol.Part of #1810.