Re: [RFC/dwarf-2] Add support for included files

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 08:25:00AM +0100, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> We have noticed that, if compiled with dwarf-2, GDB is unable to
> set a breakpoint inside hello.c using the file:lineno syntax:
> 
>         % gcc -gdwarf-2 foo.c -o foo
>         % gdb foo
>         (gdb) b hello.c:4
>         No source file named hello.c.
>         (gdb) list hello.c:4
>         No source file named hello.c.
> 
> However, we can set the breakpoint using the function name:
> 
>         (gdb) b say_hello
>         Breakpoint 1 at 0x804833e: file hello.c, line 4.
> 
> And then once this breakpoint is set, we can now insert the
> breakpoint using the source location:
> 
>         (gdb) b hello.c:4
>         Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x804833e.
>         Breakpoint 2 at 0x804833e: file hello.c, line 4.
>         (gdb) list hello.c:4
>         1       void
>         2       say_hello (void)
>         3       {
>         4         printf ("Hello world.\n");
>         5       }

Yes... I've noticed this several times recently.

> In Dwarf-2, the list of included files is linked to the line table.
> First, we have "Line Number Program Header" which contains the "file
> names" table. And then the program itself which uses the DW_LNS_set_file
> opcode to change from file to file. There is also the DW_LNE_defile_file
> opcode that can be used to define new files instead of using the "file
> names" table.

You keep saying that.  I don't think it means what you think it means
:)  (Hint: DW_LNE_define_file, not DW_LNE_defile_file.)

> Basically, I just copy/pasted the code from dwarf_decode_lines(),
> simplified it for partial symtab processing, and then called it
> right after the compilation unit psymtab has been built. Currently,
> the function scans the line number program, and records which files
> of the "file names" table have really been included in the line program
> (that's the "file_included" array).
> 
> Here is a patch against GDB 6.0 that I used as a proof of concept.
> It does not handle the case where the compiler uses DW_LNE_defile_file
> instead of the the "file names" table yet, but that will be taken care
> of.  Would that be an acceptable approach to suggest for inclusion?

Well, the question is whether this works well enough.  Things _are_ in
these files - DW_AT_decl_file points to them.  Do we need to also put
things into the proper psymtabs?

Otherwise the approach seems reasonable.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer