This question/answer on SO shows how to use GDB to change a value in memory, but in the example given, it chooses an address to set the value that wasn't previously being used
For example, to change the return value to 22, the author does
set {unsigned char}0x00000000004004b9 = 22
However, why would this address 0x00000000004004b9 be the address to change? If you look at the output of disas/r the address 0x00000000004004b9 isn't being used, so why use this one to set to 22? I'm trying to understand how to know which address needs to be changed to (in this example) change the return value, if the output of disas/r doesn't show it.
code
$ cat t.c
int main()
{
return 42;
}
$ gcc t.c && ./a.out; echo $?
42
$ gdb --write -q ./a.out
(gdb) disas/r main
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x00000000004004b4 <+0>: 55 push %rbp
0x00000000004004b5 <+1>: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
0x00000000004004b8 <+4>: b8 2a 00 00 00 mov $0x2a,%eax
0x00000000004004bd <+9>: 5d pop %rbp
0x00000000004004be <+10>: c3 retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) set {unsigned char}0x00000000004004b9 = 22
(gdb) disas/r main
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x00000000004004b4 <+0>: 55 push %rbp
0x00000000004004b5 <+1>: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
0x00000000004004b8 <+4>: b8 16 00 00 00 mov $0x16,%eax <<< ---changed
0x00000000004004bd <+9>: 5d pop %rbp
0x00000000004004be <+10>: c3 retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) q
$ ./a.out; echo $?
22 <<<--- Just as desired
I'm trying to understand how to know which address needs to be changed to (in this example) change the return value, if the output of disas/r doesn't show it.
To understand this, you need to understand instruction encoding. The instruction here is "move immediate 32-bit constant to register". The constant is part of the instruction (that's what "immediate" means). It may be helpful to compile this instead:
int foo() { return 0x41424344; }
int bar() { return 0x45464748; }
int main() { return foo() + bar(); }
When you do compile it, you should see something similar to:
(gdb) disas/r foo
Dump of assembler code for function foo:
0x00000000004004ed <+0>: 55 push %rbp
0x00000000004004ee <+1>: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
0x00000000004004f1 <+4>: b8 44 43 42 41 mov $0x41424344,%eax
0x00000000004004f6 <+9>: 5d pop %rbp
0x00000000004004f7 <+10>: c3 retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) disas/r bar
Dump of assembler code for function bar:
0x00000000004004f8 <+0>: 55 push %rbp
0x00000000004004f9 <+1>: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
0x00000000004004fc <+4>: b8 48 47 46 45 mov $0x45464748,%eax
0x0000000000400501 <+9>: 5d pop %rbp
0x0000000000400502 <+10>: c3 retq
End of assembler dump.
Now you can clearly see where in the instruction stream each byte of the immediate constant resides (and also that x86 uses little-endian encoding for them).
The standard reference on instruction encoding for x86 is Intel instruction set reference. You can find 0xB8 instruction on page 3-528.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Why does main initialize stack frame when there are no variables
(3 answers)
Trying to understand gcc option -fomit-frame-pointer
(3 answers)
What is the purpose of the RBP register in x86_64 assembler?
(2 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I have the following code:
#include <x86intrin.h>
int main() {
return __rdtsc();
}
And I tried to compile on my machine (Intel i7-6700 CPU) and objdump
g++ -Wall test_tsc.cpp -o test_tsc -march=native -mtune=native -O0 -std=c++20
objdump -M intel -d test_tsc > test_tsc.O0
Then in test_tsc.O0:
0000000000401122 <main>:
401122: 55 push rbp
401123: 48 89 e5 mov rbp,rsp
401126: 0f 31 rdtsc
401128: 48 c1 e2 20 shl rdx,0x20
40112c: 48 09 d0 or rax,rdx
40112f: 90 nop
401130: 5d pop rbp
401131: c3 ret
401132: 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 nop WORD PTR cs:[rax+rax*1+0x0]
401139: 00 00 00
40113c: 0f 1f 40 00 nop DWORD PTR [rax+0x0]
What do push rbp and mov rbp,rsp do? It seems like they were for saving the stack pointer but then there isn't really a function call. If g++ consider __rdtsc() a function call, then would there be something like call afterward?
Thanks.
rbp is the base pointer, not the stack pointer. The base pointer is used for backtrace during debugging but it is not necessary for actually running.
It is preserved through function calls so with -O3 only the expected assembly is generated:
main:
rdtsc
salq $32, %rdx
orq %rdx, %rax
ret
I am trying to alter a little bit the LLVM Backend for X86 target, to produce some desired behaviour.
More specifically, I would like to emulate a flag like gcc's fcall-used-reg option, which instructs the compiler to convert a callee-saved register into a clobbered register (meaning that it may be altered during a function call).
Let's focus on r14. I manually clobber the register, like in this answer:
#include <inttypes.h>
uint64_t inc(uint64_t i) {
__asm__ __volatile__(
""
: "+m" (i)
:
: "r14"
);
return i + 1;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
(void)argv;
return inc(argc);
}
Compile and disassemble:
gcc -std=gnu99 -O3 -ggdb3 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -o main.out main.c
objdump -d main.out
Disassembly contains:
0000000000001150 <inc>:
1150: 41 56 push %r14
1152: 48 89 7c 24 f8 mov %rdi,-0x8(%rsp)
1157: 48 8b 44 24 f8 mov -0x8(%rsp),%rax
115c: 41 5e pop %r14
115e: 48 83 c0 01 add $0x1,%rax
1162: c3 retq
1163: 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
116a: 00 00 00
116d: 0f 1f 00 nopl (%rax)
where we can see that r14, because it is tampered with, is pushed to the stack, and then popped to regain its original value.
Now, repeat with the -fcall-used-r14 flag:
gcc -std=gnu99 -O3 -ggdb3 -fcall-used-r14 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -o main.out main.c
objdump -d main.out
Disassembly contains:
0000000000001150 <inc>:
1150: 48 89 7c 24 f8 mov %rdi,-0x8(%rsp)
1155: 48 8b 44 24 f8 mov -0x8(%rsp),%rax
115a: 48 83 c0 01 add $0x1,%rax
115e: c3 retq
115f: 90 nop
where no push/pop happens.
Now, I have modified some LLVM Target files, compiled the source, and added(?) this functionality to the llc tool:
clang-11 -emit-llvm -S -c main.c -o main.ll
llc-11 main.ll -o main.s
Now, main.s contains:
# %bb.0:
pushq %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
movq %rsp, %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
pushq %r14
.cfi_offset %r14, -24
movq %rdi, -16(%rbp)
#APP
#NO_APP
movq -16(%rbp), %rax
addq $1, %rax
popq %r14
popq %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
retq
Apparently, r14 is still callee-saved.
Inside llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86CallingConv.td I have modified the following lines (removing R14), because they seemed the only relevant to the System V ABI for Linux and C calling conventions that I was interested in:
def CSR_64 : CalleeSavedRegs<(add R12, R13, R15, RBP)>;
...
def CSR_64_MostRegs : CalleeSavedRegs<(add RBX, RCX, RDX, RSI, RDI, R8, R9, R10,
R11, R12, R13, R15, RBP,
...
def CSR_64_AllRegs_NoSSE : CalleeSavedRegs<(add RAX, RBX, RCX, RDX, RSI, RDI, R8, R9,
R10, R11, R12, R13, R15, RBP)>;
My questions are:
Is X86CallingConv.td the only file I should modify? I think yes, but maybe I'm wrong.
Am I focusing on the correct lines? Maybe this is more difficult to answer, but at least a direction could be helpful.
I am running LLVM 11 inside Debian 10.5.
EDIT:
Changing the line, removing R14 from "hidden" definition:
def CSR_SysV64_RegCall_NoSSE : CalleeSavedRegs<(add RBX, RBP, RSP,
(sequence "R%u", 12, 13), R15)>;
as Margaret correctly pointed out did not help either.
Turns out, the minimum modification was the line:
def CSR_64 : CalleeSavedRegs<(add RBX, R12, R13, R15, RBP)>;
The problem was with how I built the source.
By running cmake --build . again after the original installation, the llc tool was not modified globally (I thought it would have because I was building the default architecture - X86 - but that was irrelevant). So, I was calling an unmodified llc-11 tool. Thus, when I ran:
/path/to/llvm-project/build/bin/lcc main.ll -o main.s
main.s contained:
# %bb.0:
movq %rdi, -8(%rsp)
#APP
#NO_APP
movq -8(%rsp), %rax
addq $1, %rax
retq
which is what I wanted in the first place.
class Base {
public:
Base() {}
virtual void Get() { }
};
class Derivered : public Base {
public:
virtual void Get() { }
};
int main() {
Base* base = new Derivered();
base->Get();
return 0;
}
I use gcc 5.4.0 to compile the code, and use objdump -S a.out to disassemble binary file. I want to find Base's vptr, but only display an unknown address 0x80487d4. The max address number is 0x80487b7, I cann't understand.
command list: g++ test.cpp -O0; objdump -S a.out
080486fe <_ZN4BaseC1Ev>:
80486fe: 55 push %ebp
80486ff: 89 e5 mov %esp,%ebp
8048701: ba d4 87 04 08 mov $0x80487d4,%edx
8048706: 8b 45 08 mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax
8048709: 89 10 mov %edx,(%eax)
080486fe <_ZN4BaseC1Ev>:
80486fe: 55 push %ebp
80486ff: 89 e5 mov %esp,%ebp
8048701: ba d4 87 04 08 mov $0x80487d4,%edx
8048706: 8b 45 08 mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax
8048709: 89 10 mov %edx,(%eax)
Is...
push %ebp ;- save frame pointer
mov %esp, %ebp ;- mov esp-> ebp -ebp is frame pointer
mov $0x80487d4, %edx ; load vptr address into edx
mov 0x8(%ebp), %eax ; ld eax with address of this
mov %edx,(%eax) ; store vptr in this byte 0
This question already has an answer here:
What are these seemingly-useless callq instructions in my x86 object files for?
(1 answer)
Closed 1 year ago.
I wrote a simple program and then compiled and assembled it.
tfc.cpp
int i = 0;
void f(int a)
{
i += a;
};
int main()
{
f(9);
return 0;
};
I got the tfc.o by running
$ g++ -c -O1 tfc.cpp
Then I use gobjdump (objdump) to disassemble the binary file.
$ gobjdump -d tfc.o
Then I got
0000000000000000 <__Z1fi>:
0: 55 push %rbp
1: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
4: 01 3d 00 00 00 00 add %edi,0x0(%rip) # a <__Z1fi+0xa>
a: 5d pop %rbp
b: c3 retq
c: 0f 1f 40 00 nopl 0x0(%rax)
0000000000000010 <_main>:
10: 55 push %rbp
11: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
14: bf 09 00 00 00 mov $0x9,%edi
19: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 1e <_main+0xe>
1e: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
20: 5d pop %rbp
21: c3 retq
The weird thing happened, the callq instruction is followed by 1e <_main+0xe>. Shouldn't it be the address of <__Z1fi>? If not, how does the main function call the f function?
EDIT
FYI:
$ g++ -v
Configured with: --prefix=/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/usr --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/4.2.1
Apple LLVM version 5.0 (clang-500.2.79) (based on LLVM 3.3svn)
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin13.1.0
Thread model: posix
It calls address 0, which is the address of the f function.
e8 is the call instruction in x86 according to this:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~fp/courses/15213-s07/misc/asm64-handout.pdf
call uses the displacement relative to the next instruction, at memory location 1e. That becomes memory location 0. So it's callq 1e when in reality it's calling address 0.
(gdb) n
134 a = b = c = 0xdeadbeef + ((uint32_t)length) + initval;
(gdb) n
(gdb) p a
$30 = <value optimized out>
(gdb) p b
$31 = <value optimized out>
(gdb) p c
$32 = 3735928563
How can gdb optimize out my value??
It means you compiled with e.g. gcc -O3 and the gcc optimiser found that some of your variables were redundant in some way that allowed them to be optimised away. In this particular case you appear to have three variables a, b, c with the same value and presumably they can all be aliassed to a single variable. Compile with optimisation disabled, e.g. gcc -O0, if you want to see such variables (this is generally a good idea for debug builds in any case).
Minimal runnable example with disassembly analysis
As usual, I like to see some disassembly to get a better understanding of what is going on.
In this case, the insight we obtain is that if a variable is optimized to be stored only in a register rather than the stack, and then the register it was in gets overwritten, then it shows as <optimized out> as mentioned by R..
Of course, this can only happen if the variable in question is not needed anymore, otherwise the program would lose its value. Therefore it tends to happen that at the start of the function you can see the variable value, but then at the end it becomes <optimized out>.
One typical case which we often are interested in of this is that of the function arguments themselves, since these are:
always defined at the start of the function
may not get used towards the end of the function as more intermediate values are calculated.
tend to get overwritten by further function subcalls which must setup the exact same registers to satisfy the calling convention
This understanding actually has a concrete application: when using reverse debugging, you might be able to recover the value of variables of interest simply by stepping back to their last point of usage: How do I view the value of an <optimized out> variable in C++?
main.c
#include <stdio.h>
int __attribute__((noinline)) f3(int i) {
return i + 1;
}
int __attribute__((noinline)) f2(int i) {
return f3(i) + 1;
}
int __attribute__((noinline)) f1(int i) {
int j = 1, k = 2, l = 3;
i += 1;
j += f2(i);
k += f2(j);
l += f2(k);
return l;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
printf("%d\n", f1(argc));
return 0;
}
Compile and run:
gcc -ggdb3 -O3 -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -o main.out main.c
gdb -q -nh main.out
Then inside GDB, we have the following session:
Breakpoint 1, f1 (i=1) at main.c:13
13 i += 1;
(gdb) disas
Dump of assembler code for function f1:
=> 0x00005555555546c0 <+0>: add $0x1,%edi
0x00005555555546c3 <+3>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546c8 <+8>: lea 0x1(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546cb <+11>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d0 <+16>: lea 0x2(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546d3 <+19>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d8 <+24>: add $0x3,%eax
0x00005555555546db <+27>: retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) p i
$1 = 1
(gdb) p j
$2 = 1
(gdb) n
14 j += f2(i);
(gdb) disas
Dump of assembler code for function f1:
0x00005555555546c0 <+0>: add $0x1,%edi
=> 0x00005555555546c3 <+3>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546c8 <+8>: lea 0x1(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546cb <+11>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d0 <+16>: lea 0x2(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546d3 <+19>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d8 <+24>: add $0x3,%eax
0x00005555555546db <+27>: retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) p i
$3 = 2
(gdb) p j
$4 = 1
(gdb) n
15 k += f2(j);
(gdb) disas
Dump of assembler code for function f1:
0x00005555555546c0 <+0>: add $0x1,%edi
0x00005555555546c3 <+3>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546c8 <+8>: lea 0x1(%rax),%edi
=> 0x00005555555546cb <+11>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d0 <+16>: lea 0x2(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546d3 <+19>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d8 <+24>: add $0x3,%eax
0x00005555555546db <+27>: retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) p i
$5 = <optimized out>
(gdb) p j
$6 = 5
(gdb) n
16 l += f2(k);
(gdb) disas
Dump of assembler code for function f1:
0x00005555555546c0 <+0>: add $0x1,%edi
0x00005555555546c3 <+3>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546c8 <+8>: lea 0x1(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546cb <+11>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d0 <+16>: lea 0x2(%rax),%edi
=> 0x00005555555546d3 <+19>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d8 <+24>: add $0x3,%eax
0x00005555555546db <+27>: retq
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) p i
$7 = <optimized out>
(gdb) p j
$8 = <optimized out>
To understand what is going on, remember from the x86 Linux calling convention: What are the calling conventions for UNIX & Linux system calls on i386 and x86-64 you should know that:
RDI contains the first argument
RDI can get destroyed in function calls
RAX contains the return value
From this we deduce that:
add $0x1,%edi
corresponds to the:
i += 1;
since i is the first argument of f1, and therefore stored in RDI.
Now, while we were at both:
i += 1;
j += f2(i);
the value of RDI hadn't been modified, and therefore GDB could just query it at anytime in those lines.
However, as soon as the f2 call is made:
the value of i is not needed anymore in the program
lea 0x1(%rax),%edi does EDI = j + RAX + 1, which both:
initializes j = 1
sets up the first argument of the next f2 call to RDI = j
Therefore, when the following line is reached:
k += f2(j);
both of the following instructions have/may have modified RDI, which is the only place i was being stored (f2 may use it as a scratch register, and lea definitely set it to RAX + 1):
0x00005555555546c3 <+3>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546c8 <+8>: lea 0x1(%rax),%edi
and so RDI does not contain the value of i anymore. In fact, the value of i was completely lost! Therefore the only possible outcome is:
$3 = <optimized out>
A similar thing happens to the value of j, although j only becomes unnecessary one line later afer the call to k += f2(j);.
Thinking about j also gives us some insight on how smart GDB is. Notably, at i += 1;, the value of j had not yet materialized in any register or memory address, and GDB must have known it based solely on debug information metadata.
-O0 analysis
If we use -O0 instead of -O3 for compilation:
gcc -ggdb3 -O0 -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -o main.out main.c
then the disassembly would look like:
11 int __attribute__((noinline)) f1(int i) {
=> 0x0000555555554673 <+0>: 55 push %rbp
0x0000555555554674 <+1>: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
0x0000555555554677 <+4>: 48 83 ec 18 sub $0x18,%rsp
0x000055555555467b <+8>: 89 7d ec mov %edi,-0x14(%rbp)
12 int j = 1, k = 2, l = 3;
0x000055555555467e <+11>: c7 45 f4 01 00 00 00 movl $0x1,-0xc(%rbp)
0x0000555555554685 <+18>: c7 45 f8 02 00 00 00 movl $0x2,-0x8(%rbp)
0x000055555555468c <+25>: c7 45 fc 03 00 00 00 movl $0x3,-0x4(%rbp)
13 i += 1;
0x0000555555554693 <+32>: 83 45 ec 01 addl $0x1,-0x14(%rbp)
14 j += f2(i);
0x0000555555554697 <+36>: 8b 45 ec mov -0x14(%rbp),%eax
0x000055555555469a <+39>: 89 c7 mov %eax,%edi
0x000055555555469c <+41>: e8 b8 ff ff ff callq 0x555555554659 <f2>
0x00005555555546a1 <+46>: 01 45 f4 add %eax,-0xc(%rbp)
15 k += f2(j);
0x00005555555546a4 <+49>: 8b 45 f4 mov -0xc(%rbp),%eax
0x00005555555546a7 <+52>: 89 c7 mov %eax,%edi
0x00005555555546a9 <+54>: e8 ab ff ff ff callq 0x555555554659 <f2>
0x00005555555546ae <+59>: 01 45 f8 add %eax,-0x8(%rbp)
16 l += f2(k);
0x00005555555546b1 <+62>: 8b 45 f8 mov -0x8(%rbp),%eax
0x00005555555546b4 <+65>: 89 c7 mov %eax,%edi
0x00005555555546b6 <+67>: e8 9e ff ff ff callq 0x555555554659 <f2>
0x00005555555546bb <+72>: 01 45 fc add %eax,-0x4(%rbp)
17 return l;
0x00005555555546be <+75>: 8b 45 fc mov -0x4(%rbp),%eax
18 }
0x00005555555546c1 <+78>: c9 leaveq
0x00005555555546c2 <+79>: c3 retq
From this horrendous disassembly, we see that the value of RDI is moved to the stack at the very start of program execution at:
mov %edi,-0x14(%rbp)
and it then gets retrieved from memory into registers whenever needed, e.g. at:
14 j += f2(i);
0x0000555555554697 <+36>: 8b 45 ec mov -0x14(%rbp),%eax
0x000055555555469a <+39>: 89 c7 mov %eax,%edi
0x000055555555469c <+41>: e8 b8 ff ff ff callq 0x555555554659 <f2>
0x00005555555546a1 <+46>: 01 45 f4 add %eax,-0xc(%rbp)
The same basically happens to j which gets immediately pushed to the stack when when it is initialized:
0x000055555555467e <+11>: c7 45 f4 01 00 00 00 movl $0x1,-0xc(%rbp)
Therefore, it is easy for GDB to find the values of those variables at any time: they are always present in memory!
This also gives us some insight on why it is not possible to avoid <optimized out> in optimized code: since the number of registers is limited, the only way to do that would be to actually push unneeded registers to memory, which would partly defeat the benefit of -O3.
Extend the lifetime of i
If we edited f1 to return l + i as in:
int __attribute__((noinline)) f1(int i) {
int j = 1, k = 2, l = 3;
i += 1;
j += f2(i);
k += f2(j);
l += f2(k);
return l + i;
}
then we observe that this effectively extends the visibility of i until the end of the function.
This is because with this we force GCC to use an extra variable to keep i around until the end:
0x00005555555546c0 <+0>: lea 0x1(%rdi),%edx
0x00005555555546c3 <+3>: mov %edx,%edi
0x00005555555546c5 <+5>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546ca <+10>: lea 0x1(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546cd <+13>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546d2 <+18>: lea 0x2(%rax),%edi
0x00005555555546d5 <+21>: callq 0x5555555546b0 <f2>
0x00005555555546da <+26>: lea 0x3(%rdx,%rax,1),%eax
0x00005555555546de <+30>: retq
which the compiler does by storing i += i in RDX at the very first instruction.
Tested in Ubuntu 18.04, GCC 7.4.0, GDB 8.1.0.
It didn't. Your compiler did, but there's still a debug symbol for the original variable name.
From https://idlebox.net/2010/apidocs/gdb-7.0.zip/gdb_9.html
The values of arguments that were not saved in their stack frames are shown as `value optimized out'.
I'm guessing you compiled with -O(somevalue) and are accessing variables a,b,c in a function where optimization has occurred.
You need to turn off the compiler optimisation.
If you are interested in a particular variable in gdb, you can delare the variable as "volatile" and recompile the code. This will make the compiler turn off compiler optimization for that variable.
volatile int quantity = 0;
Just run "export COPTS='-g -O0';" and rebuild your code. After rebuild, debug it using gdb. You'll not see such error. Thanks.