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 A35FC3858C50; Thu,  7 Apr 2022 14:30:16 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A35FC3858C50
From: "wcohen at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug translator/29037] Systemtap unable to find struct bitfield
 members for gcc11 compiled code
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2022 14:30:16 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: systemtap
X-Bugzilla-Component: translator
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wcohen at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: systemtap at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-29037-6586-CAW5hqef1Y@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29037-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29037-6586@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: systemtap@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Systemtap mailing list <systemtap.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/systemtap>,
 <mailto:systemtap-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/systemtap/>
List-Help: <mailto:systemtap-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/systemtap>,
 <mailto:systemtap-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2022 14:30:16 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29037

--- Comment #1 from William Cohen <wcohen at redhat dot com> ---
There are some differences in member information for the field.  In the dwa=
rf
for RHEL8 see:

0x000002f8:   DW_TAG_structure_type
                DW_AT_name      ("fields")
                DW_AT_byte_size (0x01)
                DW_AT_decl_file ("/home/wcohen/fields.c")
                DW_AT_decl_line (6)
                DW_AT_decl_column       (0x08)
                DW_AT_sibling   (0x00000346)

0x00000305:     DW_TAG_member
                  DW_AT_name    ("icsk_ca_state")
                  DW_AT_decl_file       ("/home/wcohen/fields.c")
                  DW_AT_decl_line       (7)
                  DW_AT_decl_column     (0x0a)
                  DW_AT_type    (0x000002ec "__u8")
                  DW_AT_byte_size       (0x01)
                  DW_AT_bit_size        (0x05)
                  DW_AT_bit_offset      (0x03)
                  DW_AT_data_member_location    (0x00)


For Rawhide there is no DW_AT_data_member_location:

0x00000088:   DW_TAG_structure_type
                DW_AT_name      ("fields")
                DW_AT_byte_size (0x01)
                DW_AT_decl_file ("/home/wcohen/fields.c")
                DW_AT_decl_line (6)
                DW_AT_decl_column       (0x08)
                DW_AT_sibling   (0x000000ca)

0x00000095:     DW_TAG_member
                  DW_AT_name    ("icsk_ca_state")
                  DW_AT_decl_file       ("/home/wcohen/fields.c")
                  DW_AT_decl_line       (7)
                  DW_AT_decl_column     (0x0a)
                  DW_AT_type    (0x0000007c "__u8")
                  DW_AT_bit_size        (0x05)
                  DW_AT_data_bit_offset (0x00)

dwflpp.cxx:3470 has a check on DW_AT_data_member_location and only adds thi=
ngs
if there a DW_AT_data_member_location.  According to DWARF5.pdf
DW_AT_data_bit_offset would also be valid:

The member entry corresponding to a data member that is defined in a struct=
ure,
union or class may have either a DW_AT_data_member_location attribute or a
DW_AT_data_bit_offset attribute. If the beginning of the data member is the
same as the beginning of the containing entity then neither attribute is
required.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=