* [Bug default/18941] New: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues @ 2015-01-01 0:00 dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` [Bug default/18941] " dodji at redhat dot com ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: dodji at redhat dot com @ 2015-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: libabigail https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18941 Bug ID: 18941 Summary: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues Product: libabigail Version: unspecified Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: default Assignee: dodji at redhat dot com Reporter: dodji at redhat dot com CC: libabigail at sourceware dot org Target Milestone: --- Sometimes it's interesting to raise awareness about some noticeable constructs found in the debug information of the binary we are interested in. For instance, there can be situations where a library does not have any debug information for a class because the compiler knows that it will be emitted along with the vtable in another library. In that case, only a simple forward declaration is found for the class in the current library. This is fine for debugging, but interferes with ABI verification. In this case, it would be useful that abidiff, abidw or other related tools emit a clear diagnostic about the situation. The library maintainer could deal with the issue by using e.g the -femit-class-debug-always option of the G++ where she sees fit. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug default/18941] Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues 2015-01-01 0:00 [Bug default/18941] New: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues dodji at redhat dot com @ 2015-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: dodji at redhat dot com @ 2015-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: libabigail https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18941 dodji at redhat dot com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug default/18941] Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues 2015-01-01 0:00 [Bug default/18941] New: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` [Bug default/18941] " dodji at redhat dot com @ 2015-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com 2016-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com 2016-01-01 0:00 ` woodard at redhat dot com 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: dodji at redhat dot com @ 2015-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: libabigail https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18941 --- Comment #1 from dodji at redhat dot com --- We'd also like to detect possible ODR violations, now that libabigail knows about ODR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Definition_Rule). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug default/18941] Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues 2015-01-01 0:00 [Bug default/18941] New: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` [Bug default/18941] " dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com @ 2016-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com 2016-01-01 0:00 ` woodard at redhat dot com 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: dodji at redhat dot com @ 2016-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: libabigail https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18941 dodji at redhat dot com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |20937 --- Comment #3 from dodji at redhat dot com --- (In reply to dodji from comment #1) > We'd also like to detect possible ODR violations, now that libabigail knows > about ODR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Definition_Rule). I have filled enhancement request #20937 to track this specifically as it's a request that has come up on several occasions. Referenced Bugs: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20937 [Bug 20937] Detect ODR violations -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug default/18941] Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues 2015-01-01 0:00 [Bug default/18941] New: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues dodji at redhat dot com ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2016-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com @ 2016-01-01 0:00 ` woodard at redhat dot com 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: woodard at redhat dot com @ 2016-01-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: libabigail https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18941 --- Comment #2 from Ben Woodard <woodard at redhat dot com> --- Many of the cases which I think need warnings are more prosaic. If it comes along a case where the DWARF has been stripped or was never generated, then most if not all of the ABI verification is not being done. This should be a higher priority warning. This could also remind people to point the libabigail utilities toward an external debuginfo file. I would say that this is a high enough priority that it should be the default unless some --quiet option is passed on the command line. A lower priority warning would be a exported function entry point for a non-static function that exists in ELF but doesn't exist in the available DWARF. This is important because we need to know the things that we are not yet examining. I thought the option should be something like -Wunexamined-functions A similar situation is the one you mention where you have a forward declaration but no information about the class. -Wunexamined-classes I think that -Wunions probably should be there too. This would trip if libabigail found any unions in the DWARF and emit the union's name for manual verification. I do not recall seeing this in the release notes. We should probably have a note saying that unions are not examined for ABI compatibility in the release notes. And finally because the number of these warnings will likely grow over time we should probably have something like: -W which turns on common problems -Wall which turns on every single warning. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-12-06 12:43 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-01-01 0:00 [Bug default/18941] New: Add a warning option to libabigail tools to report possible DWARF issues dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` [Bug default/18941] " dodji at redhat dot com 2015-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com 2016-01-01 0:00 ` dodji at redhat dot com 2016-01-01 0:00 ` woodard at redhat dot com
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).