From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 252703857C68 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 16:09:24 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 252703857C68 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (173-246-6-90.qc.cable.ebox.net [173.246.6.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7651A1E5F9; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 12:09:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] Fix issues with reading rnglists, especially from dwo files, for DWARF v5 To: Caroline Tice Cc: "H.J. Lu" , Eric Christopher , Tom Tromey , Caroline Tice via Gdb-patches References: <5ccfe911-6049-e8f3-4874-9991b2649512@simark.ca> <4da310be-fa9f-9f21-8988-81af58ec73e3@simark.ca> <804c1d3e-522f-f6bf-0106-330dcfd1fc50@simark.ca> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <931facde-3f98-68e9-01f2-4c994cfa9721@simark.ca> Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 12:09:20 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) 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: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 16:09:25 -0000 On 2020-07-16 11:46 a.m., Caroline Tice wrote: > We do in fact need the .debug_line section, because the test relies on > setting a breakpoint at a particular line, and then seeing whether or > not we can find the value of a variable in the lexical block there; > without line table information I don't think GDB will be able to do > that. It's possible to set breakpoints some other way, like by label (I think). But yeah, we can still have a v3/v4 .debug_line if needed. Simon