c/6885: Incorrect DWARF3 emitted for C VLA constructs
jcownie@etnus.com
jcownie@etnus.com
Fri May 31 04:56:00 GMT 2002
>Number: 6885
>Category: c
>Synopsis: Incorrect DWARF2 emitted for C VLA constructs
>Confidential: no
>Severity: serious
>Priority: medium
>Responsible: unassigned
>State: open
>Class: sw-bug
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Fri May 31 04:56:01 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: James Cownie
>Release: 3.1
>Organization:
jcownie@etnus.com
>Environment:
System: Linux pc4 2.4.18 #1 Tue Apr 2 10:17:01 BST 2002 i686 unknown
Architecture: i686
host: i686-pc-linux-gnu
build: i686-pc-linux-gnu
target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
configured with: /home1/GNU/gcc-3.1/configure
>Description:
The DWARF3 debug information emitted for C variable length array
objects is incorrect (and incomplete).
I am aware that the compiler's support for these constructs is listed
as "broken", however this code, at least, appears to work, it's just
that the debug information emitted is incomplete/incorrect.
Consider code like this
//
// A simple test for variable size arrays
// (Use // comments just for amusement).
//
#include <stdio.h>
int foo(int x)
{
return x;
}
int takes_adjustable (int dim1, int dim2, int adjustable[dim1][foo(dim2)])
{
int sum = 0;
int i;
for (i=0; i<dim1; i++)
{
int j;
for (j=0; j<dim2; j++)
sum += adjustable[i][j];
}
return sum;
}
int local_adjustable (int dim)
{
int la [dim];
int i;
for (i=0; i<dim; i++)
la[i] = i;
return dim;
}
int main (int argc, char ** argv)
{
int la [argc][argc*argc];
int i;
for (i=0; i<argc; i++)
{
int j;
for (j=0; j<argc*argc; j++)
la[i][j] = i*j;
}
printf ("Sum is %d\n", takes_adjustable (argc, argc*argc, la));
local_adjustable (20);
}
If we look at the DWARF emitted for the argument "adjustable" in
takes_adjustable we see (relevant chunks extracted from readelf -wi) :-
<2><d2a>: Abbrev Number: 26 (DW_TAG_formal_parameter)
DW_AT_name : adjustable
DW_AT_decl_file : 1
DW_AT_decl_line : 12
DW_AT_type : <d88>
DW_AT_location : 2 byte block: 91 10 (DW_OP_fbreg: 16; )
<1><d88>: Abbrev Number: 11 (DW_TAG_pointer_type)
DW_AT_byte_size : 4
DW_AT_type : <d70>
** It's a pointer to an object of type <d70>
<1><d70>: Abbrev Number: 4 (DW_TAG_array_type)
DW_AT_sibling : <d83>
DW_AT_type : <97>
<2><d79>: Abbrev Number: 30 (DW_TAG_subrange_type)
DW_AT_type : <90>
DW_AT_upper_bound : <d21>
** <d70> is an array of type <97> with an upperbound of variable <d21>
<1><97>: Abbrev Number: 7 (DW_TAG_base_type)
DW_AT_name : int
DW_AT_byte_size : 4
DW_AT_encoding : 5 (signed)
** <97> is an integer
<2><d21>: Abbrev Number: 27 (DW_TAG_variable)
DW_AT_artificial : 1
DW_AT_type : <d83>
DW_AT_location : 2 byte block: 91 70 (DW_OP_fbreg: -16; )
** <d21> is some store location of type <d83>
<1><d83>: Abbrev Number: 19 (DW_TAG_const_type)
DW_AT_type : <97>
** <d83> is a const int.
So, we're completely missing the _second_ dimension of this object,
it's been declared as a vector of int, rather than either a vector of
vector of int, or 2D array of int.
>How-To-Repeat:
As above.
>Fix:
Unknown
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list