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 3037739A4873; Fri,  6 Aug 2021 15:44:08 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3037739A4873
From: "simark at simark dot ca" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug symtab/28200] DW_AT_ranges handling in partial_die_info::read
 does not handle discontinuous ranges
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 15:44:07 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: symtab
X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: simark at simark dot ca
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-28200-4717-jpVtJtVxUc@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-28200-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-28200-4717@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
X-BeenThere: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gdb-prs mailing list <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/gdb-prs>,
 <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-prs/>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/gdb-prs>,
 <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 15:44:08 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D28200

--- Comment #6 from Simon Marchi <simark at simark dot ca> ---
Here's my interpretation of your post, just to make sure I understand
correctly.

I. Looks correct
II. Looks correct
III. Now it sounds like bad debug info, because the CU's ranges is not a
superset of its children.  Unless GDB knows better (producer X produces wro=
ng
CU ranges), I think it is correct to trust the CU's ranges, so the result s=
hown
looks correct.  (I wouldn't mind having a maintenance mode where we compute=
 the
ranges from the CU's children even if the CU has ranges, and compare the two
address maps to see if there's a difference.  That could mean a bug in GDB =
or
in the debug info.)
IV. When the CU doesn't provide ranges, we fall back on building an address=
 map
that is the intersection of everything found under the CU.  At this point it
looks correct, because you still haven't put a "hole" in the function's ran=
ges.
V. Now that you've put a hole in the function's ranges, we should see the h=
ole,
therefore it's incorrect.

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