From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17849 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2007 12:03:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 17840 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Oct 2007 12:03:57 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:03:54 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465C898340 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:03:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB849833F for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:03:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1IlNup-00074b-Tw for gdb@sourceware.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 08:03:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Another Fortran problem... Message-ID: <20071026120351.GC26327@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sourceware.org References: <19c433eb0710260339w341f3437u4797445de7bc36d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19c433eb0710260339w341f3437u4797445de7bc36d@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-10/txt/msg00262.txt.bz2 On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 11:39:11AM +0100, Fran?ois-Xavier Coudert wrote: > Is "DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name: foo_" the reason for this difference? Yes. > Should DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name actually be emitted or is this wrong? I'm not sure. I was just looking at this problem; I have some in-progress patches that remove GDB's use of DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name, and I was very surprised when they fixed a recent gnats PR about a similar Fortran problem. "foo_" is really the linkage name, so if gfortran wants to emit DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name then that's the value it should have. But GDB doesn't have a demangler for Fortran mangled names so it ends up stuck with the mangled name. What sort of mangling does gfortran do? Should we be able to demangle it? Or just ignore linkage names for Fortran? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery