From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 8D816383DB8B; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 19:46:04 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8D816383DB8B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1676317564;
	bh=vdCEy0WmaplZZpTpqstF9btdWgqtA0658NaRZf3JcWs=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=sRkaJAL1BuOWT+jVOp0RGthHgMBjDmGpOK2P/lcQ5cSNbIpUYZDMWLO9vOkgfkAG6
	 9GSNRB/WPlJKdUVDfFL2fXmrP/oWE5Gm07dbvmggnOsmES3RlCQw3eKJniQMgwt2zH
	 cjqrpdgdNIEz72jD98oiqxD8cgNJtyxqnK08OgOk=
From: "ssbssa at sourceware dot org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug win32/18027] dwarf2 debug info after rebasing DLLs unusable
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 19:46:04 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: win32
X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ssbssa at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-18027-4717-k809uH1HfE@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-18027-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-18027-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D18027

--- Comment #9 from Hannes Domani <ssbssa at sourceware dot org> ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #8)
> > I'm pretty sure the problem is that the dwarf2 debug info contains
> > absolute addresses which don't match the load address of the DLL after
> > rebase.
>=20
> Ok... so if I'm understanding correctly, this might not completely
> be a gdb bug, since what's happening is that the DLL is rebased but
> some addresses in the DWARF are not updated.

I also think that this isn't really a gdb bug.


> However, maybe gdb could work around this some way, if we had a
> way to determine the original base?  Like, for DWARF symbols,
> gdb could do ADDR - ORIG + NEW to compute the address?
>=20
> My apologies if this is misguided, I'm still not sure I understand
> what is going on.

I looked into this problem a few years ago, but I couldn't figure out a way=
 to
determine the original base from the debug symbols.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=