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

[Denis Khalikov <d dot khalikov at partner dot samsung dot com>]

Thanks for review,

> Skimming over the patch I noticed you duplicate libiberties xcrc32
> functionality.

should i take care about standalone libbacktrace ?
https://github.com/ianlancetaylor/libbacktrace

> Also the additions to posix.c probably belong to dwarf.c and elf.c 
(the feature
> is dwarf + elf specific but proper abstraction / #ifdefing should
> ensure compiling
> also succeeds for non-dwarf / non-elf platforms).

thanks, i will move code to elf.c since it's about reading section from 
elf format.


On 03/14/2017 11:27 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Denis Khalikov
> <d.khalikov@partner.samsung.com> wrote:
> > Hello everyone, i have a patch for this issue.
>
> Great!
>
> > List of implemented functionality:
> >
> > 1.Reading .gnu_debuglink section from ELF file:
> >  a. Reading name of debug info file.
> >  b. Verifying crc32 sum.
> >
> > 2. Searching for separate debug info file from paths:
> >  a. /usr/lib/debug/path/to/executable
> >  b. /path/to/executable
> >  c. /path/to/executable/.debug
> >
> > Assumed that debug info file generated by objcopy from binutils.
> >
> > objcopy --only-keep-debug foo foo.debug
> > strip -g foo
> > objcopy --add-gnu-debuglink=foo.debug foo
>
> Skimming over the patch I noticed you duplicate libiberties xcrc32
> functionality.
>
> Also the additions to posix.c probably belong to dwarf.c and elf.c (the feature
> is dwarf + elf specific but proper abstraction / #ifdefing should
> ensure compiling
> also succeeds for non-dwarf / non-elf platforms).
>
> Leaving actual review to the maintainer (CCed).
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.