From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3231 invoked by alias); 5 May 2012 07:11:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 3215 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2012 07:10:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-qc0-f169.google.com) (209.85.216.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 May 2012 07:10:45 +0000 Received: by qcsd16 with SMTP id d16so2736749qcs.0 for ; Sat, 05 May 2012 00:10:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=NUoCgjc67Hocv+Ny1PjK4zzOXDyQdfjc9AKXukSMPqA=; b=FW+QZQAhict8SL/azOyfFanPmrkxSManM6HQNTmUxRDExAqNgn9k7uGFmDvyYzOFTC fa8dFfGs0y9gKGXngGw87ls3J6nAp2MBjhW381B0QQcIwIkodrCFQBgLLGPhJsPCW9T5 RxhGCz/9APwzqXUC9DlYagwX8pTyw+zvGwTH0D3uBmgDLPTqR1TLqotrjBR+8LlwGh4u t4Ag2NR2q3mDkEwzCnE3XMNMWAO+hgIkX++nrUg5AV2yEGg3bHMhshdHRUMFVObjruSC ZblPHS5fDorcIR9loF2rYlO5BZbQTTJOHrC/8m2NukyzZKvnENdRmSU7fBTUf/3Ne5cc KiAQ== Received: by 10.229.137.139 with SMTP id w11mr3954555qct.99.1336201844586; Sat, 05 May 2012 00:10:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.137.139 with SMTP id w11mr3954536qct.99.1336201844324; Sat, 05 May 2012 00:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.215.132 with HTTP; Sat, 5 May 2012 00:10:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120505070432.GA8744@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <4F95630D.1000202@redhat.com> <83vckqfpzb.fsf@gnu.org> <87ehrcco7v.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120504180458.GA32257@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120505070432.GA8744@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 07:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FAILing new testcase for -fdebug-types-section [Re: [RFC - Python scripting] New methods Symtab.global_block and Symtab.static_block (docs included)] From: Siva Chandra To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey , Eli Zaretskii , Phil Muldoon , ratmice@gmail.com, Doug Evans Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQle9wmKR2zsTJU7DiYdPXHssdNmWwJqoDB636i+wUz3htkJR9EGUBlpnVng04wfUAB/xfE1YrxC1EpqFodoKKe+7dGrb9rvHDiKcxnhynNFUDccYuCeD+SG3qqHyG04l2kOPQ6B50ONfBmFczlRbaCbPoZzRw== 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00155.txt.bz2 On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Isn't it just hiding some real DWARF GCC or GDB bug? > > I do not say your code is wrong, your patch may have just discovered a bug > elsewhere but I did not have time to investigate it more so I though you may > provide the explanation where the real bug is. I did notice this issue and did mention the difference during the discussion about this patch. Essentially, I see a difference in interpreting user defined types as global in C++ and as static in C. I was planning to raise a question on this on gdb@. If you feel there is no urgency in eliminating the failure you are seeing, I will dig a little more into this and start a discussion in a few days. Thanks, Siva Chandra