This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] Support DW_OP_call2 and DW_OP_call4 (PR 10640)
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:08:44 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch] Support DW_OP_call2 and DW_OP_call4 (PR 10640)
- References: <20090920123647.GA30021@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <email@example.com>
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 02:43:04PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Yeah, I could not think of a way to avoid it either. I think parsing
> the DWARF while reading would be worse than what you have now, because
> (IIUC) it would negatively impact performance.
This is all part of inter-CU references. You can't (always) parse it
as you read it in; there can be dependency loops.
I'm confused as to why the "struct symbol" comes into this though.
We're just using it to look up its DWARF location again. Can we do
this directly off the target DIE? We don't free up the loaded
.debug_info (partly to support DW_FORM_string). And we have
infrastructure to load a given CU's dies whenever we need them.
IIUC this would require a different implementation of the baton
for DIEs without a symbol.