From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 549933857C56 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 19:38:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 549933857C56 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-74-jIDuN6-eNWmebPSvEdlpFA-1; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 14:38:34 -0500 X-MC-Unique: jIDuN6-eNWmebPSvEdlpFA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA6AB92502; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 19:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from f35-zws-1 (unknown [10.2.16.28]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED371196FF; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 12:38:31 -0700 From: Kevin Buettner To: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Cc: Simon Marchi , Keith Seitz , Simon Marchi Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: work around negative DW_AT_data_member_location GCC 11 bug Message-ID: <20220126123831.5febd9dd@f35-zws-1> In-Reply-To: References: <20211129153725.1499053-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <844ce501-7a0d-2806-2a57-d08c71e8bcb4@polymtl.ca> <53f71b5f-a989-7eef-0178-9a96a414ece8@redhat.com> <09e59830-968a-0054-b5be-03e2bbe153dc@redhat.com> Organization: Red Hat MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 19:38:39 -0000 On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 14:34:11 -0500 Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote: > In fact, I am tempted to add a producer check and only apply the fixup > if the producer is gcc 11. > > Since GDB doesn't know how to handle negative data member offsets (if > that's even possible), I think that if we encounter a negative offset > (other than the case above), we should just emit a complaint and leave > the field's location as unknown. I like both of these ideas. Kevin