[RFA] dwarf2_physname
Keith Seitz
keiths@redhat.com
Wed Sep 16 20:27:00 GMT 2009
On 09/15/2009 09:11 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> So, if icc is failing to mark things artificial, does it make up for
> it by having DW_AT_object_pointer? I don't believe GCC generates that
> attribtue (guess it should!).
Unfortunately, ICC does not emit DW_AT_object_pointer. It outputs only
what I've previously posted.
> This is an area where, pain or not, I'd really prefer to have only one
> way to do things.
I can certainly understand that (and I agree): I was just throwing that
out as an option. Afterall, there is a bigger picture (for you) to
consider -- I'm just a linux-centered, who-cares-about-anything-else
hacker. O:-)
> I looked over your patch again. I have no objection and Tom's already
> approved it upthread; I think you're good to go.
Tom has suggested to me to conform and start posting bigger bits of the
patches. Unless I hear anything to the contrary, I'll consider this a
general approval of the approach, and I will attempt to submit any
outstanding isolated patches before posting the whole (ginormous) patch
which implements everything.
I've also added a page to the wiki about running the test suite on
non-gcc compilers (specifically ICC and RealView). It's not complete in
the sense that I think some careful Dejagnu configury and/or compiler
wrapper trickery might produce better (or more meaningful) results, but
it's a start.
For example, I completely ignore the whole multilib issue. In my case, I
was really just interested in the C++ DWARF implementations of these
compilers, and I believe the setup is sufficient for this purpose. In a
real world scenario, it probably isn't. I hope that people who
remember/know more about this stuff add their two bits to the page.
Keith
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list