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 A80AC3858D3C; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 09:06:01 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A80AC3858D3C
From: "rui314 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/91239] gcc generates invalid .debug_macro sections
 (according to lld folks)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 09:06:01 +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: 9.1.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rui314 at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-91239-4-ZGbzkJLIFV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91239-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91239-4@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: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 09:06:01 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D91239

Rui Ueyama <rui314 at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rui314 at gmail dot com

--- Comment #6 from Rui Ueyama <rui314 at gmail dot com> ---
I can add a support to mold so that mold works for this test case. I'm not =
100%
sure what's the correct behavior though.

It looks like we should redirect references to dead comdat members to
prevailing ones. But is there any guarantee that all COMDAT members have the
exact same set of members? We deduplicate COMDAT groups just by looking at
their group names and don't compare their members.

Or, can we just leave `.debug_macros` sections even if they are in deduplic=
ated
COMDAT groups?=