From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id BEFA2385843F; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:11:36 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BEFA2385843F
From: "wcohen at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/103241] Odd 0 length entries in location lists
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:11:36 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wcohen at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-103241-4-1FusmB9YK0@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-103241-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-103241-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:11:36 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103241

--- Comment #10 from Will Cohen <wcohen at redhat dot com> ---
That example in comment #5 at [0x0000000000000055, 0x0000000000000055) looks
different than the original example as it is referring to an argument for an
inlined function.  The function mentioned in the original description
static_protections is declared as inlined but is actually generated as an
non-inlined function.

Would https://dwarfstd.org/ShowIssue.php?issue=3D170427.1  apply in the ori=
ginal
example?  Are there actual multiple views of the parameters in the places w=
ith
0-length location list entries?

The first 0-length location list entry for prot would be=20

        .byte   0x4
        .uleb128 .LVL615-.LVL615
        .uleb128 .LVL615-.LVL615
        .uleb128 0x1
        .byte   0x55

The second 0-length location list entry in the location list would be:

        .byte   0x4
        .uleb128 .LVL637-.LVL615
        .uleb128 .LHOTE19-.LVL615
        .uleb128 0x1
        .byte   0x52=