PeAndPdbAreMatched returns false on x64 binaries about syzygy HOT 9 OPEN

Deleting chrome.exe and rebuilding did not resolve the problem. Deleting chrome.exe and chrome.exe.pdb and rebuilding also didn't help. For some reason I have only seen this on gn official builds of chrome.exe.

Here's the output from checking the GUID/age of chrome.exe/chrome.exe.pdb, and then sizeviewer.py failing:

C:\src\Temp\foo>pdbinfo chrome.exe.pdb
Timestamp GUID age
578452F2, {801EF37A-84B3-4DD5-B7A1-243401FEC766}, 4

C:\src\Temp\foo>dumpbin /headers chrome.exe | find /i "rsds"
57855971 cv 5F 000F81DC F6BDC Format: RSDS, {801EF37A-84B3-4DD5-B7A1-243401FEC766}, 4, C:\src\chromium4\src\out\gn_release_official\initialexe\chrome.exe.pdb

C:\src\Temp\foo>python c:\src\chromium4\src\tools\win\sizeviewer\sizeviewer.py chrome.exe
Tallying chrome.exe...
[0712/142001:INFO:application_impl.h(46)] Syzygy CodeTally Version 0.8.19.0 (da2c31c).
[0712/142001:INFO:application_impl.h(48)] Copyright (c) Google Inc. All rights reserved.
[0712/142001:ERROR:pdb_info.cc(93)] Unable to process PE file: chrome.exe
[0712/142001:ERROR:code_tally.cc(108)] PDB file 'chrome.exe.pdb' does not match image file 'chrome.exe'.

gn builds settings are:
is_component_build = false
is_debug = false
is_official_build = true

Build position is 1e4191f489c9aff5e298a895aed4d663864599a7

from syzygy.

Note that this is a 64-bit build. Maybe that is the problem?

from syzygy.

The Syzygy tools really haven't been tested against 64 bit builds. There's no reason why the code tally wouldn't work with 64 bit builds, as it only really walks the symbols, except this one place where it leans on the binary to get at the symbols.

from syzygy.

Updating the title to list the actual root cause. Given that Chrome now defaults to 64-bit on Windows it may be important to update this. Maybe?

from syzygy.

I'll take a look-see, though we don't envision porting Syzygy at large to 64 bit.

from syzygy.

At the very least it would be nice if syzygy's various tools gave better error messages when asked to process 64-bit binaries. That would have made investigating this breakage easier: crbug.com/628055

from syzygy.

Syzygy is pretty much in maintenance mode now, there really isn't a team
backing it any more. CLs are welcome, though.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:20 PM Bruce Dawson [email protected]
wrote:

At the very least it would be nice if syzygy's various tools gave better
error messages when asked to process 64-bit binaries. That would have made
investigating this breakage easier: crbug.com/628055

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#47 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABY1F8yMbUTjwGBKvktnrxVkHxdFYD2Bks5qVm_BgaJpZM4JK1TE
.

from syzygy.

hum, it doesn't seem too hard to add a small check in our PE parser , it's probably worth doing this.

from syzygy.

Most of our tools should outright reject 64 bit binaries as they do.
Unfortunately the check is pretty much buried down at the bottom of a stack
of layers, and so the error message is cryptic.
It would make sense to pre-flight all the binaries we handle by testing
their magic and fail with a less cryptic message. After that, you could
consider fixing the base layer to allow 64 bit PE binaries.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:19 PM Sébastien Marchand [email protected]
wrote:

hum, it doesn't seem too hard to add a small check in our PE parser , it's
probably worth doing this.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#47 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABY1F93UUyrXkR5c-MZUs39vz0AAO0CTks5qVn23gaJpZM4JK1TE
.

from syzygy.