From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16945 invoked by alias); 11 May 2009 21:19:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 16931 invoked by uid 22791); 11 May 2009 21:19:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 May 2009 21:19:01 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B302BAB9D; Mon, 11 May 2009 17:18:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Tx+sT7vTnNZp; Mon, 11 May 2009 17:18:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41ECE2BAB8B; Mon, 11 May 2009 17:18:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A7D5DF5905; Mon, 11 May 2009 23:18:55 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 21:19:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix "break foo" when `foo's prologue ends before line table Message-ID: <20090511211855.GA7584@adacore.com> References: <83skjebbef.fsf@gnu.org> <20090511194247.GA9877@caradoc.them.org> <83vdo7xtk1.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83vdo7xtk1.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-05/txt/msg00230.txt.bz2 > I would think so. What I show in my mail comes from "maint print > symbols", so I have no reason to believe the lineinfo table does not > reflect the COFF debug info. You should be able to find another confirmation of this by looking at the .s file. I don't know what assembler directive is used on DJGPP to emit lines, but it's usually straightforward. > Maybe. But the lines before that are just decorations, from the > > Is it possible to patch this up in the coff line table reader? > > What, by inventing extra entries in the table? That could be > dangerous, since we would be doing that without any clear idea of the > code between 0x172c and 0x1748. I don't think it matters what the code does, since otherwise you would skip that code before inserting the breakpoint anyway. > Even if we could, is that really better than the approach I suggested? Not sure if this is better or not. The advantage of this approach is that we protect other platforms from this form of debugging info - one could argue that it's incomplete. -- Joel