Re: [RFA] Don't apply line-number tweaks for non-GCC compilers

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

   From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
   Date: 09 Nov 2004 14:53:03 -0500

   For what it's worth, this change implements the suggestion I made.

I went ahead and checked this in.

Mark

   >    Index: ChangeLog
   >    from  Mark Kettenis  <kettenis@gnu.org>
   > 
   > 	   * dbxread.c (process_one_symbol): Do not adjust address of first
   > 	   N_SLINE stab for a function for code generated by non-GCC
   > 	   compilers.
   > 
   > 
   >    Index: dbxread.c
   >    ===================================================================
   >    RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/dbxread.c,v
   >    retrieving revision 1.74
   >    diff -u -p -r1.74 dbxread.c
   >    --- dbxread.c 11 Sep 2004 10:24:46 -0000 1.74
   >    +++ dbxread.c 19 Oct 2004 20:45:53 -0000
   >    @@ -2927,11 +2927,26 @@ process_one_symbol (int type, int desc, 
   > 	  /* Relocate for dynamic loading and for ELF acc fn-relative syms.  */
   > 	  valu += function_start_offset;
   > 
   >    -      /* If this is the first SLINE note in the function, record it at
   >    -	 the start of the function instead of at the listed location.  */
   >    +      /* GCC 2.95.3 emits the first N_SLINE stab somwehere in the
   >    +	 middle of the prologue instead of right at the start of the
   >    +	 function.  To deal with this we record the address for the
   >    +	 first N_SLINE stab to be the start of the function instead of
   >    +	 the listed location.  We really shouldn't to this.  When
   >    +	 compiling with optimization, this first N_SLINE stab might be
   >    +	 optimized away.  Other (non-GCC) compilers don't emit this
   >    +	 stab at all.  There is no real harm in having an extra
   >    +	 numbered line, although it can be a bit annoying for the
   >    +	 user.  However, it totally screws up our testsuite.
   >    +
   >    +	 So for now, keep adjusting the address of the first N_SLINE
   >    +	 stab, but only for code compiled with GCC.  */
   >    +
   > 	  if (within_function && sline_found_in_function == 0)
   > 	   {
   >    -	  record_line (current_subfile, desc, last_function_start);
   >    +	  if (processing_gcc_compilation == 2)
   >    +	    record_line (current_subfile, desc, last_function_start);
   >    +	  else
   >    +	    record_line (current_subfile, desc, valu);
   > 	     sline_found_in_function = 1;
   > 	   }
   > 	  else