This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [patch] Workaround ada (gnat-4.3.0) on x86_64


On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 04:02:54 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote:
...
> Just to help doing the comparison, attached is the assembly file
> generated by our version of the compiler (this is on ia32).

But this .s file does not correspond to `comp_bug.adb' present in GDB HEAD
as at least line 37 is not present in the line table there.

Does the testcase work for you with GDB HEAD gdb.ada/packed_tagged.exp ?
The same memory trashing problem is there for me for gcc-4.1.2-33.i386 and for
gcc-4.3.0-8.i386 (Fedora 8 and 9, resp.) when trying the ia32 arch.

While it does not fix the FAIL it has no regressions (for the gcc testsuite on
i386+x86_64 and with the GDB testsuite) and it no longer trashes the memory
by omitting the unknown DW_AT_byte_size values (instead of writing them out
with the value 0xffffffff):
	GCC PR 35998 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15654


> For the simpler example that you provided in this thread (adaff), where
> you have a simple null record, I'd be interested in looking at the
> debugging info.  This is a straight record with no field inside it.
> The debugging info should be trivial and the debugger should be able
> to print your variable without any problem.

Yes, sorry, I was confused by the non-DWARF2 ADA hack for dynamic types.


Regards,
Jan


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]