Re: [PATCH 3/3] [gdb/symtab] Tweak fix-up of truncated inline function block ranges

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

On 3/12/26 7:45 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 3/11/26 4:13 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> On 3/11/26 2:24 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> On 3/10/26 5:05 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>>>> Which is why I tried to write DWARF assembler tests to cover edge cases
>>>> as I found them, and I think it would be great if we could get such a
>>>> test to cover this fix too. 
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>>> I'm happy to help with, or even write, the
>>>> test, once I can reproduce the failure.
>>>
>>> My first try:
>>> ...
>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp b/ 
>>> gdb/ testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ext
>>> end-inline-block.exp
>>> index 9e4798b53f3..82d3f7e0310 100644
>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp
>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp
>>> @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ proc build_dwarf_for_contiguous_block { asm_file } {
>>>           DW_LNS_copy
>>>
>>>           DW_LNE_set_address main_3
>>> -        line $::foo_call_line
>>> +        line [expr $::foo_call_line + 1]
>>>           DW_LNS_negate_stmt
>>>           DW_LNS_copy
>>> ...
>>> doesn't seem to work (in the sense of causing failure with the fix 
>>> applied), I'll investigate a bit further to understand why.
>>
>> OK, I think this:
>> ...
>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp b/ 
>> gdb/ testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ext
>> end-inline-block.exp
>> index 9e4798b53f3..4a88250d927 100644
>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp
>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp
>> @@ -120,10 +120,10 @@ proc build_dwarf_for_contiguous_block 
>> { asm_file } {
>>           DW_LNS_copy
>>
>>           DW_LNE_set_address main_4
>> +        DW_LNS_advance_line 1
>>           DW_LNS_copy
>>
>>           DW_LNE_set_address main_5
>> -        DW_LNS_advance_line 1
>>           DW_LNS_negate_stmt
>>           DW_LNS_copy
>> ...
>> is the patch that represents the behavior I was seeing.
>>
>> The testcase doesn't completely pass though, I get:
>> ...
>> (gdb) PASS: $exp: contiguous block: step to second line of foo
>> step^M
>> 28        /* foo:3 */^M
>> (gdb) PASS: $exp: contiguous block: step to third line of foo
>> step^M
>> 37        /* main:4 */^M
>> (gdb) FAIL: $exp: contiguous block: set back to main
>> ...
>> so the message saying we're back in main is missing.
>>
> 
> I've filed a PR ( https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi? 
> id=33981 ) with some analysis.

I've submitted a patch ( 
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2026-March/225916.html ) 
for this, which also contains a disabled test for the PR in this thread 
(PR33930).

Thanks,
- Tom