This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc 2/2] Follow DW_AT_linkage_name for methods [Re: The future of dwarf2_physname]
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 20:28:12 +0200
- Subject: Re: [rfc 2/2] Follow DW_AT_linkage_name for methods [Re: The future of dwarf2_physname]
- References: <4DD44983.7060406@redhat.com> <20110523131659.GA30344@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20110524212111.GB7747@host1.jankratochvil.net> <m3lixu3461.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4DE68663.7070408@redhat.com> <20110602162533.GB28038@host1.jankratochvil.net> <m3ipsom6y6.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 20:20:01 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:
>
> Jan> This is a regression by the physname patch which introduced
> Jan> DMGL_VERBOSE in symbol_find_demangled_name, some other patches of
> Jan> mine being posted are going to remove DMGL_VERBOSE there.
>
> I infer this to mean that, with your DW_AT_linkage_name patch, we do not
> need Keith's series for 7.3. Is that correct?
For ctors/dtors (and for non-GCC compilers) DW_AT_linkage_name does not exist
and it falls back to the physname code.
Some other former code dealing with ctors/dtors in symtabs before physname
code was introduced has been already removed as obsoleted by physname.
Therefore I believe any physname improvements still have effect for
ctors/dtors handling.
Thanks,
Jan