Re: [PATCH][PR sanitizer/77631] Support separate debug info in libbacktrace

[Maxim Ostapenko <m dot ostapenko at samsung dot com>]

Hi Ian,

On 12/09/17 17:05, Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:06 AM, Denis Khalikov
> <d.khalikov@partner.samsung.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for answer.
> > I understood all points which you mentioned, but can't
> > find last one
> > > It seems to work
> > > out the file name a second time, even though the file name must
> > > already be known.
> > Can you please show me where I've missed that, if you have a time for that.
> It's quite possible that I misunderstand the patch.  I was looking at
> the call to a copy of get_exec_filename in fileline_initialize.
>
> > Anyway, your patch works for me.
> Thanks for testing.  I will commit it later, probably today.

As far as I can see, this patch wasn't committed to trunk so far. Did 
you meet some issues with current implementation? Do we need to perform 
more testing here?

Thanks,
-Maxim

> Ian
>
>
> > On 09/11/2017 12:11 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Denis Khalikov
> > > <d.khalikov@partner.samsung.com> wrote:
> > > > Hello Ian,
> > > > thanks for review.
> > > > I've updated the patch, can you please take a look.
> > >
> > > Apologies again for the length of time it took to reply.  I've had a
> > > hard time understanding the patch.  It's quite likely that I don't
> > > understand how it works, but it seems to pass the same file descriptor
> > > to process_elf_header twice.  It seems to look for debug files with
> > > the buildid in places where they will not be found.  It seems to work
> > > out the file name a second time, even though the file name must
> > > already be known.  I eventually just wrote my own implementation.
> > >
> > > Could you try this patch and see if it works for your cases?  The
> > > patch is against current mainline.  Thanks.
> > >
> > > Ian