From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28557 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2008 22:31:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 28536 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Feb 2008 22:31:18 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:30:59 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 464F098036; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:30:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9739801D; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:30:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JOhAu-0001Fl-AQ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:30:56 -0500 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:31:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Aleksandar Ristovski Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Do not add partial_symbol again and again to the list Message-ID: <20080211223056.GA3833@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Aleksandar Ristovski , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <47B0AEC7.3070400@qnx.com> <20080211203809.GA29560@caradoc.them.org> <47B0B56F.4010607@qnx.com> <20080211210935.GA31767@caradoc.them.org> <47B0C0F4.4090302@qnx.com> <20080211214750.GA1953@caradoc.them.org> <47B0C7C6.9090605@qnx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47B0C7C6.9090605@qnx.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg00190.txt.bz2 On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:10:14PM -0500, Aleksandar Ristovski wrote: > unsigned int > _GCC_ATTR_ALIGN_64t > long long int > _GCC_ATTR_ALIGN_u64t > long long unsigned int > _Int64t OK, I remember what's going on now. I think you've missed something about these lists. Suppose we've got two C files combined into one objfile by the linker. One has "typedef long long _Int64t" and the other has "typedef struct { int hi, int lo; } _Int64t". GDB records that type as present in both files. All the partial symbol says is that there's a typedef named _Int64t; it doesn't say what it's typedef'd to. Because it's a typedef, the DWARF-2 reader adds it to the list of file-scope symbols. There's a single list of file-scope partial symbols for the whole objfile, objfile->static_psymbols. Each psymtab has an offset (statics_offset) saying where in that file-wide list of symbols to look for static symbols for this particular file. So it's a single "list", but it contains many individual lists. That's why there's a bcache; many files may have identical psymbols, but the psymbol belongs to each individual file. Your patch leaves the types out of every file after the first. I believe it will cause GDB to fail to locate the correct type or enumerator. Functions will be unaffected, since the psymbol includes the address, so there won't be duplicates anyway. We don't know at this stage of processing if the typedef, struct, or enumerator in the new file has the same value as the one in the previous file; we don't have values until we read in full symbols. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery