This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: MIPS_STABS_ELF is now broken
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 08:54:50AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 11:38:52AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 08:31:42AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 11:59:06PM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 2002-06-10 H.J. Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > * config/tc-mips.c (s_mips_file): Never pass the first .file
> > > > > directive to dwarf.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Daniel solved this a different way, by adjusting the file directives
> > > > that come out of gcc. See the patch he posted to gcc-local and I was
> > > > meaning to test a few days ago.
> > > >
> > >
> > > How does it work with gcc 2.96? I don't want to modify gcc 2.96 for that.
> > > The fact is before that change, everything works fine. I don't believe
> > > modifying gcc is the solution. Are you going to offer the new gcc binary
> > > for each different version of Linux/mips gcc? In any case, I will fix it
> > > in my Linux binutils if you plan not to support the existing Linux/mips
> > > gcc binary.
> >
> > HJ, the debug information being emitted by GCC is obviously in error.
> > If you ignore the first .file directive, you will then not accept
> > _VALID_ DWARF-2 debug information. You can't have it both ways. This
> > is not the first time recently that an advance in GCC or binutils for
> > Linux/MIPS has required a corresponding advance in the other.
> >
> > Eric, if you think this sort of compatibility is important we could
> > accept HJ's patch to ignore the first .file directive, and modify GCC
> > to emit '.file "dummy"' or the like to make the situation clear. I
> > think this will just hurt our interactions with other assemblers,
> > though. We should probably talk about this.
>
> On x86, gcc 3.1 emits
>
> .file "f.c"
> .file 1 "f.c"
> .section .debug_abbrev,"",@progbits
> .Ldebug_abbrev0:
>
> for dwarf. Can't mips take 2 .file directives?
That's peculiar, the first .file lacks a number... you have a point
here, let me investigate.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer