From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 4O2ZOPMX0mAtYAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 13:03:47 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E52E51F1F2; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 13:03:47 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.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 1414A1E54D for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 13:03:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA173393C85F for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:03:46 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CA173393C85F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1624381426; bh=hCHhaQyJeQ2/Q0HHOr/GvFDhfQfYlkC2a2ajEoAgL/o=; 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=SKL9AB/eZJ4mTOGKF5TDgJjvWOk1O77Gj1ud0aChu6KmjLaE4SCef7QQZdVxBg8Fs k8q0PcEygEsdRCd6VLmUumwDFdms7zKc8MXg3H/OT2NYW+XtdGcxBGcW17e1tpFixu pyEfsOYOr4EybyRWyKgIgRDCn841FI00um4fJCGw= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587EE393AC0B for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:02:00 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 587EE393AC0B Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-592-39v4RW41PnKSlJ-AjBoNgg-1; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 13:01:58 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 39v4RW41PnKSlJ-AjBoNgg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC13818414A3 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:01:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.3.113.139] (ovpn-113-139.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.139]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CC3017CEE for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:01:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RFC] PING [Re: [PATCH] Fix macro info lookup for binaries containing DWARFv5 line table] To: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" References: <20210512171655.9463-1-SourabhSingh.Tomar@amd.com> <22ab603a-35e1-4048-3ccc-6738a13889df@redhat.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 10:01:56 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: Keith Seitz via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Keith Seitz Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" I think this might be something we should consider including in gdb-11. Keith On 6/8/21 11:48 AM, Keith Seitz via Gdb-patches wrote: > RFC ping > > Anyone at all have an opinion on this direction? > > Keith > > On 5/24/21 11:47 AM, Keith Seitz via Gdb-patches wrote: >> On 5/24/21 4:36 AM, Tomar, Sourabh Singh wrote: >>> [AMD Public Use] >>> >>> Hello Keith, >>> >>> Could you please share your plan WRT to this patch. >>> Do you want to take it forward ? or you want me to take this forward. >>> >> >> I can pursue this... >> >> In that vein, does anyone (maintainers?) have an input on my "counterpatch" >> (reposted below) that removes this IS_ABSOLUTE_PREFIX stuff and copies the >> symtab's filename? >> >> I haven't officially submitted this as a patch because I'm curious whether >> my reading of this is correct/complete. Maybe the documentation/comments >> are incorrect or no longer valid? >> >> FWIW, I've tested that patch on native x86_64 Fedora 34 with no regressions. >> >> Keith >> >> Patch under discussion: >> >> gdb/ChangeLog >> >> * dwarf2/line-header.c (line_header::file_file_name): Copy >> the symtab's filename. >> >> diff --git a/gdb/dwarf2/line-header.c b/gdb/dwarf2/line-header.c >> index 7575297f966..117c5a42cc5 100644 >> --- a/gdb/dwarf2/line-header.c >> +++ b/gdb/dwarf2/line-header.c >> @@ -69,15 +69,10 @@ line_header::file_file_name (int file) const >> { >> const file_entry *fe = file_name_at (file); >> >> - if (!IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH (fe->name)) >> - { >> - const char *dir = fe->include_dir (this); >> - if (dir != NULL) >> - return gdb::unique_xmalloc_ptr (concat (dir, SLASH_STRING, >> - fe->name, >> - (char *) NULL)); >> - } >> - return make_unique_xstrdup (fe->name); >> + /* macro_source_file requires: "This filename is relative to the >> + compilation directory, it exactly matches the symtab->filename >> + content." */ >> + return make_unique_xstrdup (fe->symtab->filename); >> } >> else >> { >> >