From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id A43C0385480F; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:46:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A43C0385480F
From: "mark at klomp dot org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: dwz@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug default/27213] alt_clear_dups: Assertion `child->die_dup ==
 NULL' failed.
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:46:59 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: dwz
X-Bugzilla-Component: default
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mark at klomp dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: nobody at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-27213-11298-uWAJ0oiV62@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-27213-11298@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-27213-11298@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: dwz@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dwz mailing list <dwz.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/dwz>,
 <mailto:dwz-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/dwz/>
List-Help: <mailto:dwz-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/dwz>,
 <mailto:dwz-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:46:59 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D27213

Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mark at klomp dot org

--- Comment #1 from Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org> ---
It doesn't help with this case. But reviewing the code I found that there w=
as
at least one place where we didn't hash the DW_FORM_implicit_const value in
checksum_die meaning that two DIEs which only differed in an attribute (whi=
ch
we didn't already handle specially) using a DW_FORM_implicit_const with a
different value (maybe a DW_AT_byte_size) could possibly hash to the same
value.

diff --git a/dwz.c b/dwz.c
index 308bcba..e556dfb 100644
--- a/dwz.c
+++ b/dwz.c
@@ -3580,7 +3580,11 @@ checksum_die (DSO *dso, dw_cu_ref cu, dw_die_ref
top_die, dw_die_ref die)
          ptr +=3D ptr_size;
          break;
        case DW_FORM_flag_present:
+         break;
        case DW_FORM_implicit_const:
+         if (! handled)
+           die->u.p1.die_hash
+             =3D iterative_hash_object (t->values[i], die->u.p1.die_hash);
          break;
        case DW_FORM_flag:
        case DW_FORM_data1:

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=