From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26016 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2004 20:15:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26007 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2004 20:15:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.187.230.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Jan 2004 20:15:56 -0000 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id B160D1A440D; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:13:20 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16409.26976.292424.689823@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 20:15:00 -0000 To: Andrew Cagney , fedor@doc.com Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/symtab] Move find_pc_section call to lookup_minimal_symbol_by_pc In-Reply-To: <4016E401.2050001@gnu.org> References: <4016E401.2050001@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00745.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > Hello, > > Ref: RFA symtab: Fix for PR c++/1267 ("next" and shared libraries) > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-07/msg00354.html > > The change unfortunatly broke IRIX 6.5's host compiler which is using > mdebugread :-( That code was looking for a symbol in the absolute > section "*ABS*" but the PR/1267 change was causing *ABS* symbols to be > ignored (find_pc_section didn't return an absolute section). > > Since the underlying problem with PR/1267 was with the frame code > needing a minimal symbol that was in the same section as the frame's PC, > and that code [indirectly] calls lookup_minimal_symbol_by_pc, I moved > the find_pc_section call to that function. > > Tested on i386 GNU/Linux (dwarf 2) with no regressions. > Tested on PPC NetBSD (stabs) with no regressions. > Tested on IRIX and all the warnings, and many failures, disappeared. > See gdb/1519 for how to exercise the bug. > > ok? ok. Does it still fix shlibs/1237 and shlibs/1280 too? Adam, could you check please? elena