From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 5vetM5WZJ2GWLAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:39:33 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id B59321EE1B; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:39:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 135B71ECEB for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:39:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885523857C51 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:39:32 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 885523857C51 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1629985172; bh=afELm6qO8lqAFeahaLJCvyjBK6ZCvxDdtx14Itq6MZM=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=lOgaQEXsgAIV4UNZdTLGhVXBn0gWYeNxT81AO44xPLCiv3ipZkKLbEKxLXR3AgF2S kBZUmirTuE3VtRaqiSKTpbqVR7m8vVREGmaj5bMaXEz7x0aWhMdlhYacRWQrHNs1J3 HuyB2jUj0gyLBY1K200OsiT3gLF+lG7z84VtaT40= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B6D43858402 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:39:04 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 3B6D43858402 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 17QDcwJ6010723 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:39:03 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 17QDcwJ6010723 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E3EE1ECEB; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:38:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Add label option to proc cu To: Tom de Vries , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20210826115605.GA22680@delia> Message-ID: <62258296-6132-ff23-cd4c-2f2820249a60@polymtl.ca> Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:38:58 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210826115605.GA22680@delia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:38:58 +0000 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2021-08-26 7:56 a.m., Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches wrote: > Hi, > > We can use current dwarf assembly infrastructure to declare a label that marks > the start of the CU header: > ... > declare_labels header_start_cu_a > _section ".debug_info" > header_start_cu_a : cu {} { > } > _section ".debug_info" > header_start_cu_b : cu {} { > } > ... > on the condition that we switch to the .debug_info section before, which makes > this style of use fragile. > > Another way to achieve the same is to use the label as generated by the cu > proc itself: > ... > variable _cu_label > cu {} { > } > set header_start_cu_a $_cu_label > cu {} { > } > set header_start_cu_b $_cu_label > ... > but again that seems fragile given that adding a new CU inbetween will > silently result in the wrong value for the label. And this is done by poking in the internals of the framework, not good. > Add a label option to proc cu such that we can simply do: > ... > declare_labels header_start_cu_a > cu { label header_start_cu_a } { > } > cu { label header_start_cu_b } { > } That looks like the right way to do it. But can we make it so the caller doesn't need to use declare_labels? For example, with rnglists' -post-header-label switch, it's not needed, so I presume it would be possible here. Simon