Thanks Tom for your comments.

Please find the updated patch which include your suggestions.

> is this tag check really needed?
I want to keep this limited to functions.

Regards,
Alok

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> 
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 10:00 PM
To: Sharma, Alok Kumar via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: Sharma, Alok Kumar <AlokKumar.Sharma@amd.com>; George, Jini Susan <JiniSusan.George@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Accept functions with DW_AT_linkage_name present

[CAUTION: External Email]

>>>>> Sharma, Alok Kumar via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:

> Currently GDB is invalidating any function not havnig DW_AT_name which 
> is why it is not able to debug OpenMP (Clang).

> It should be fair to fallback to check DW_AT_linkage_name in case 
> DW_AT_name is absent.

Thank you for the patch.

> -  name = dwarf2_name (die, cu);
> +  if (dwarf2_name (die, cu))
> +    name = dwarf2_name (die, cu);
> +  else
> +    name = dw2_linkage_name (die, cu);

Nowadays we are preferring checks against nullptr rather than implicit decays to bool.

Also I think it's better to call dwarf2_name less often, so I'd write this as:

   name = dwarf2_name (die, cu);
   if (name == nullptr)
     name = dw2_linkage_name (die, cu);

> -  name = dwarf2_name (die, cu);
> +  if (dwarf2_name (die, cu))
> +    name = dwarf2_name (die, cu);
> +  else if (die->tag == DW_TAG_subprogram
> +           || die->tag == DW_TAG_subroutine_type
> +           || die->tag == DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
> +           || die->tag == DW_TAG_entry_point)
> +    name = dw2_linkage_name (die, cu);

Similar change here.
Though ... is this tag check really needed?

Tom