From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3753 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2012 03:51:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 3744 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jan 2012 03:51:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 03:51:34 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8AF82BB0CA; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 22:51:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id rSC+lg1LvLVD; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 22:51:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED3C2BB0A0; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 22:51:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B231F145615; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:51:13 +0400 (RET) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 03:55:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Doug Evans Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] dwarf2read.c: Don't read pc/line-number mapping for type units Message-ID: <20120110035113.GA31383@adacore.com> References: <20120110014616.957501E25C7@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120110014616.957501E25C7@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00285.txt.bz2 > Type units don't need the pc/line-number mapping, > and this can save a lot of space. Types in general have a sloc, and we sometimes use them. For instance, trying the following: (gdb) ptype ambiguous_type Multiple matches for ambiguous_type [0] cancel [1] pck.ambiguous_type at pck.adb:8 [2] bar.ambiguous_type at bar.adb:9 > Is your patch going to affect the above? > Joel: I'd also like to check this into the 7.4 branch. > IMO it's safe enough. No problem on my end if the concerns above are unfounded. Although I know I do not know this file as well as you do. -- Joel