From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 472903858D20; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 15:22:07 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 472903858D20 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1729092127; bh=z+JTpMNTXEN4ZKpBaq6E4lTWLW1F+Ly4K8C5kJ5VGis=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Czpa80QlDgi7MKjqbqfRY4LmxWLPzBIzRcF+hrSjPcgf3WRHRzmqcRiRS+syE8tyu 9JMa4b22nTvDInqePndTAWl0fiB1P7kHY3pgwC3Evyt+2pmxQMdFBAMI40kwLEQhZq qedP5PA49n0JOk/TQdJnnT4zppGcIUJHLqethRNY= From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug symtab/30728] [gdb/symtab, cc-with-dwz] FAIL: gdb.cp/breakpoint-locs.exp: break N1::C1::baz Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 15:22:06 +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: vries at gcc dot gnu.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: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30728 --- Comment #21 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #16) > I wonder if gdb-index and debug-names correctly attribute these > symbols to the including CU. If not then we'll see the bug there as well. Good point. FWIW, the approach of adding DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine entries to the index (I'm currently rebasing that series) seems to work. With .gdb_index, we get: ... [721] N1::C1::baz: 2 [global, function] 1 [global, other] 2 [global, other] ... and with .debug_names: ... [ 5] _ZN2N12C13bazEv: <4> DW_TAG_subprogram DW_IDX_compile_unit=3D1 DW_IDX_die_offset=3D<= 0x31> DW_IDX_GNU_language=3D33 DW_IDX_GNU_linkage_name=3D1 <5> DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine DW_IDX_compile_unit=3D1 DW_IDX_die_offset=3D<0xac> DW_IDX_GNU_language=3D33 DW_IDX_GNU_linkage_name= =3D1 <5> DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine DW_IDX_compile_unit=3D2 DW_IDX_die_offset=3D<0x13d> DW_IDX_GNU_language=3D33 DW_IDX_GNU_linkage_nam= e=3D1 [ 9] baz: <6> DW_TAG_subprogram DW_IDX_compile_unit=3D1 DW_IDX_die_offset=3D<= 0x31> DW_IDX_GNU_language=3D33 DW_IDX_parent=3D1 <7> DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine DW_IDX_compile_unit=3D1 DW_IDX_die_offset=3D<0xac> DW_IDX_GNU_language=3D33 DW_IDX_parent=3D1 <7> DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine DW_IDX_compile_unit=3D2 DW_IDX_die_offset=3D<0x13d> DW_IDX_GNU_language=3D33 DW_IDX_parent=3D1 ... and in both cases, doing "break N1::C1::baz" results in two breakpoint locations. For the .gdb_index case, the "other" might be need to be "function" instead, but regardless it seems to work. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=