From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-11767-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 31640 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2003 17:39:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 31628 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2003 17:39:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Jan 2003 17:39:11 -0000
Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail)
	by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 18WM3I-0008Vl-00; Wed, 08 Jan 2003 13:39:48 -0600
Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 18WKAt-0006yE-00; Wed, 08 Jan 2003 12:39:31 -0500
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 17:39:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Sunil Alankar <sunil.alankar@coware.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: GDB 5.2/5.3 breakpoint bug
Message-ID: <20030108173931.GB22279@nevyn.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Sunil Alankar <sunil.alankar@coware.com>,
	gdb@sources.redhat.com
References: <IMEGIEBLGLIOEGOLAFIEOELOCEAA.sunil.alankar@coware.com> <IMEGIEBLGLIOEGOLAFIEGENJCEAA.sunil.alankar@coware.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <IMEGIEBLGLIOEGOLAFIEGENJCEAA.sunil.alankar@coware.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i
X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:49:31PM -0800, Sunil Alankar wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> While debugging this in function, find_pc_sect_line (CORE_ADDR pc, struct
> sec *section, int notcurrent)
> I found there were two line items in a line table with the same value of PC.
> First one gets picked as the best match. But this had item->line == 0. The
> next line item with the same value for item->pc, but a valid item->line ( >
> 0) does not get picked as the best match.
> I put in the following check to correct this. My question is,
> Is it valid to have have more than one line item with same value faor PC and
> possibly 0 for line in one of them? What causes this?
> Would this be an appropriate fix? Or is the problem more deep rooted in
> creating the symbol table?

When this happens, are the two lines in different files?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer