[RFA] Fix inconsistency in blockvector addrmap vs non-addrmap handling
Doug Evans
dje@google.com
Fri Jun 22 20:51:00 GMT 2012
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Jan Kratochvil
<jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 03:14:46 +0200, Doug Evans wrote:
>> --- buildsym.c 29 May 2012 20:23:17 -0000 1.97
>> +++ buildsym.c 5 Jun 2012 00:26:01 -0000
>> @@ -1024,8 +1027,15 @@ end_symtab (CORE_ADDR end_addr, struct o
>> {
>> /* Define the STATIC_BLOCK & GLOBAL_BLOCK, and build the
>> blockvector. */
>> - finish_block (0, &file_symbols, 0, last_source_start_addr,
>> - end_addr, objfile);
>> + struct block *static_block;
>> +
>> + static_block = finish_block (0, &file_symbols, 0,
>> + last_source_start_addr, end_addr,
>> + objfile);
>> + /* Mark the range of the static block so that if we end up using
>> + blockvector.map then find_block_in_blockvector behaves identically
>> + regardless of whether the addrmap is present. */
>> + record_block_range (static_block, last_source_start_addr, end_addr - 1);
>
> On IRC Doug made a note:
> Arguably the second is the better fix but it's still a hack as
> addrmaps are intended to handle discontiguous symtabs and this defeats
> that.
>
> Where "the first fix" was:
> [RFA] Fix gdb segv in dw2_find_pc_sect_symtab
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-05/msg00958.html
>
> I think the right way is to call dwarf2_record_block_ranges for
> DW_AT_compilation_unit but I haven't tried to write such patch yet, is there
> a problem?
>
>
>> finish_block_internal (0, &global_symbols, 0, last_source_start_addr,
>> end_addr, objfile, 1);
>> blockvector = make_blockvector (objfile);
With some work that could be made to work.
But remember that the static block (or global block) doesn't exist
until the call to end_symtab, and, barring even more work, you need to
get the range into pending_addrmap before the call to make_blockvector
where pending_addrmap is turned into a fixed addrmap.
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list