This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: dwarf 2.1 .debug_ranges
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: dwarf 2.1 .debug_ranges
- From: Michael Eager <eager at mvista dot com>
- Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 19:52:27 -0700
- CC: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: MontaVista Software, Inc.
- References: <20010727122534.A28963@redhat.com>
Richard Henderson wrote:
> Is the dwarf 2.1 committee still meeting?
Yes. We are trying to wrap up loose ends at the moment.
BTW, the next revision of Dwarf will be version 3.
> IMO there is a serious flaw in the formulation of DW_AT_ranges
> and the associated .debug_ranges section. The same flaw exists
> with location lists, but they're in dwarf 2.0 and therefore
> harder to fix.
As Daniel Berlin mentioned, this is handled by the non-contiguous
> As far as location lists go, I'd suggest that for backward compatibility
> the begin/end ranges be relative to the compilation unit iff the
> compilation unit has a DW_AT_low_pc. If it doesn't, as with functions
> in different sections, then the addresses should be absolute.
If functions are contiguous, then there is backward compatibility.
There is a desire to reduce the number of relocations which need
to be done by a debugger. Where possible, relative addresses are used.
Michael Eager email@example.com 408-328-8426
MontaVista Software, Inc. 1237 E. Arques Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94085