Re: [PATCH v3.2 2/5] DWARF-5: .debug_names index producer

[Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>]

On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 00:51:38 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> When I started looking at this in detail this week, I was
> a bit surprised to learn that the names table is essentially the
> same as .gdb_index's, meaning full-qualified names with no
> overload/parameter info, and especially -- no indication
> of which language the name is for, which was a nuisance
> for making C++ wildmatching support work with .gdb_index.
> Somehow I had the impression that it was different from
> earlier chats.  OTOH, the upside is that that we'll manage
> to reuse the mapped_index::name_components code for .debug_names.

The features of splitting the components of fully qualified names was planned
as an add-on patch on top of this one.  Although GDB did not have real support
for that when I was writing this patchset and I expected it would be then
written more as a part of that components support even for the .debug_names
index.  The goal of the initial .debug_names implementation was to match
.gdb_index.


> > +      if (to_underlying (per_cu.sect_off) >= (static_cast<uint64_t> (1) << 32))
> > +	return true;
> 
> These look like always return false, since per_cu.sect_off is 32-bit?
> I've left it as is, but it doesn't look right to me.  Seems like
> that makes all the 64-bit support dead as is.

I did not know GDB does not support 64-bit DWARF now:

/* * Offset relative to the start of its .debug_info or .debug_types
   section.  */
DEFINE_OFFSET_TYPE (sect_offset, unsigned int);


Jan