Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>
To: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFA 2/4] dwarf2_physname
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:19:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100201221905.GA15584@caradoc.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B674D1B.5040209@redhat.com>

On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 01:52:27PM -0800, Keith Seitz wrote:
> For this code, gcc will output a type-like information DIE tree,
> telling us ONLY about the composition of the anonymous namespace with
> namespace G and variable Xg. Later gcc gives us a DIE with
> DW_AT_location (to continue my (poor) type analogy: an instance of
> the variable). To describe this DIE, we also get DW_AT_specification
> and nothing more. Just DW_AT_location and DW_AT_specification.
> 
> If we do not follow DW_AT_specification, dwarf2_physname will put the
> variable Xg in the global namespace instead of "(anonymous
> namespace)::G::Xg", which is where it really is defined.

Right.  The issue is not the presence or absence of the
DW_AT_specification; the issue is whether to follow this DIE's
parents, or its specification's parents.  The reader handles this in a
couple of other places already.  For instance, see the comment in
determine_prefix.

I think this code has evolved a couple of times since the referenced
block was added.  Certainly all callers of the old pdi_needs_namespace
are removed; the callers of die_needs_namespace are new.  It may
no longer be right.

What're we trying to answer?  For instance, is it the distinction
between local variables and global variables?  This is interesting
because I believe that function-local classes get the enclosing
function as a prefix, but obviously function-local automatic variables
should not.

Judging from some examples, you can not distinguish function local and
function static variables without decoding DW_AT_location.  But that's
not the most important case; we don't need to qualify function local
variables in the symbol table and things will work out OK.

I'm not sure how DW_TAG_member comes into this either, that doesn't
entirely make sense for non-static class members.  Be careful about
this one: GCC sometimes incorrectly uses DW_TAG_variable, when the
DWARF standard says they should be DW_TAG_member.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery


  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-01 22:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-20 21:20 Keith Seitz
2009-11-20 22:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-11-21  0:04   ` Tom Tromey
2009-11-21  3:46     ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-11-23 18:06       ` Tom Tromey
2009-11-23 19:00         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-11-23 16:52   ` Keith Seitz
2009-11-23 17:08     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-11-24 19:20       ` Sami Wagiaalla
2010-01-27 17:10         ` Sami Wagiaalla
2009-12-08 19:47   ` Keith Seitz
2009-12-14 19:33     ` Keith Seitz
2009-12-17 20:19       ` Tom Tromey
2009-12-17 20:28         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-12-17 22:39           ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-12-22 18:35           ` Tom Tromey
2009-12-22 19:24             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-01-20 20:37               ` Keith Seitz
2010-01-26 21:17                 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-01-27 19:12                   ` Keith Seitz
2010-01-28 20:22                     ` Keith Seitz
2010-01-28 20:24                       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-01-28 23:41                         ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-01 16:48                           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-01 19:32                             ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-01 19:39                               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-01 21:52                                 ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-01 22:19                                   ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2010-02-02 23:23                                     ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-02 23:31                                       ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-03  2:46                                       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-04 17:48                                         ` Tom Tromey
2010-02-04 18:14                                           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-05 17:13                                             ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-05 17:29                                               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-05 20:24                                                 ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-05 20:57                                                   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-05 23:10                                                     ` Keith Seitz
2010-02-05 23:46                                                       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-04 17:21                             ` Tom Tromey
2010-02-04 17:25                               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-11-23  7:31 ` André Pönitz
2009-11-23 16:57   ` Keith Seitz
2009-11-23 17:20     ` Tom Tromey
2009-11-24  7:22     ` André Pönitz
2009-11-24 22:54       ` Tom Tromey
2009-11-25  9:16         ` André Pönitz
2009-11-25 18:14           ` Tom Tromey
2009-11-23 17:15   ` Tom Tromey
2009-11-24 22:11 ` Joel Brobecker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100201221905.GA15584@caradoc.them.org \
    --to=dan@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=keiths@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox