commit ab0c5c25509600b7c9cecc9e10baebc984082b50
gpg: Signature made Fri 12 May 2023 11:18:18 AM EDT
gpg:                using RSA key 5D38116FA4D3A7CC77E378D37E83610126DCC2E8
gpg: Good signature from "Frank Ch. Eigler <[email protected]>" [full]
Author: Frank Ch. Eigler <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri May 12 11:13:45 2023 -0400

    PR30442: failing optional statement probes should not trigger pass2 exceptions
    
    In tapsets.cxx, query_cu() and query_module() aggressively caught &
    sess-print_error'd semantic_errors from subsidiary call sites.  They
    are unaware of whether the probe in question is being resolved within
    an optional (? or !) context.  Instead of this, they now simply let
    the exceptions propagate out to derive_probes() or similar, which does
    know whether exceptions are errors in that context.  That means
    exceptions can propagate through elfutils iteration machinery too,
    perhaps risking C level memory leaks, but so be it.
    
    This fix goes well beyond statement probes per se, but hand-testing
    and the testsuite appear not to show regressions related to this.
    
    Added semok/badstmt.exp to test.

diff --git a/tapsets.cxx b/tapsets.cxx
index 859160bc5..7b7107371 100644
--- a/tapsets.cxx
+++ b/tapsets.cxx
@@ -2453,8 +2453,9 @@ query_cu (Dwarf_Die * cudie, dwarf_query * q)
     }
   catch (const semantic_error& e)
     {
-      q->sess.print_error (e);
-      return DWARF_CB_ABORT;
+      // q->sess.print_error (e);
+      throw;
+      // return DWARF_CB_ABORT;
     }
 }
 
@@ -2696,8 +2697,9 @@ query_module (Dwfl_Module *mod,
     }
   catch (const semantic_error& e)
     {
-      q->sess.print_error (e);
-      return DWARF_CB_ABORT;
+      // q->sess.print_error (e);
+      // return DWARF_CB_ABORT;
+      throw;
     }
 }
 
diff --git a/testsuite/semok/stmtbad.stp b/testsuite/semok/stmtbad.stp
new file mode 100755
index 000000000..06780790a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testsuite/semok/stmtbad.stp
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+#! /bin/sh
+
+exec stap -v -p2 -e 'probe oneshot {log("nothing") }
+                     probe process.statement("main@*:1")? { log("yo") }' -c stap
+
+# The optional misaddressed statement probe should let stap still
+# succeed with the oneshot probe.