This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Partial support for dwarf3 DW_AT_ranges
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 12:13:22 -0500
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Partial support for dwarf3 DW_AT_ranges
- References: <20011231003448.A3399@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.email@example.com>
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 10:21:04AM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > GCC began emitting DW_AT_ranges back in September to deal with
> > lexical scopes made discontiguous by basic block reordering.
> > As of today, it may also create discontiguous lexical scopes
> > due to scheduling. (Before today under the same circumstances
> > we'd lose track of which instructions belonged to which scope
> > and fail to emit any debug information whatsoever.)
> > However, GDB doesn't recognize DW_AT_ranges as a valid way of
> > marking a lexical scope, which causes it to discard the scope
> > entirely. Which is probably the least useful thing that could
> > be done.
> > The following does not add proper support for discontiguous
> > address ranges. I couldn't figure out how to do that in any
> > way that wasn't horribly invasive.
> Horribly invasive to the dwarf2 reader, or to other pieces of gdb?
Other places in GDB; the framework isn't there to record it.
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer