This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Ping: RFC: add dwarf support for xcoff/AIX
On Apr 26, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Tristan Gingold <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> * because section names are limited to 8 characters, the standard
>>> dwarf names cannot be used. XCOFF defines alternate names (.dwinfo,
>>> .dwline...) But to simplify the interface with gdb and objdump, the
>>> xcoff back-end automatically canonicalize the names to the standard
>>> dwarf names. To do this I added a coff hook (expand_section_name)
>>> and a new coff macro (adjust_scnhdr_before_swap). Not sure that this
>>> conversion is a good idea, so comments are welcome here.
> I can see the attraction of this, but does it mean that objcopy and
> objdump operations on the original ("real") sections won't work?
Indeed, you will have to use the elf names. That's the minor price to pay.
> That might be a bit confusing for human (rather than scripted)
> users of the tools. Especially if you use the AIX and GNU tools
OTOH, users of GNU tools would find the XCOFF convention weird, and might prefer to stay with the standard elf names.
> An alternative might be to have a pointer to a table of section names
> in the bfd_target structure. We could then replace direct uses of
> ".debug_frame" etc. with uses of accessor macros. What do others think?