public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/108996] Proposal for adding DWARF call site information in GCC with -O0
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 13:51:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-108996-4-HTSmSFFtY2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-108996-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108996
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Ulrich Weigand from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > What is done on other arches?
>
> That depends on the platform ABI. On some arches, including x86/x86_64 and
Ah, you're right here, such functions effectively return that invisible return
address pointer on x86.
Though, relying on DW_OP_entry_value is not reliable, if e.g. tail calls are
(or could be) involved, then GDB needs to punt.
So, I wonder if we just shouldn't ask for a DWARF 6 extension here, have some
way for the compiler to specify DW_AT_location for the return value.
Then for -O1+ -g with var-tracking that address could be for PowerPC r3
register in such functions or wherever its initial value is tracked (including
DW_OP_entry_value).
While for -O0, we'd see we've spilled that parameter to stack and would set
DW_AT_location to that place spilled on the stack.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-03 13:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-02 20:28 [Bug c/108996] New: Proposal for adding DWARF call site information got " cel at us dot ibm.com
2023-03-03 8:37 ` [Bug debug/108996] Proposal for adding DWARF call site information in " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 9:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 9:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 13:14 ` uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 13:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-03-03 15:39 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 18:24 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 8:46 ` uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 8:49 ` uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 8:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-108996-4-HTSmSFFtY2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).