Duplicate .debug_lines (Was: [PATCH 5/5] Add --gdwarf-5 to ASM_SPEC)

Mark Wielaard mark@klomp.org
Sat Aug 29 15:23:12 GMT 2020


Hi,

On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 07:34:35AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 5:24 AM Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 04:38:21PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 2:38 PM Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> wrote:
> > > > Would it be possible to have something like the following in gas, so
> > > > that it doesn't try generating a .debug_line section if there already
> > > > is one, even when -gdwarf-N is given (unless the assembly also
> > > > contains .loc directives because that shows the user is really
> > > > confused)?
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/gas/dwarf2dbg.c b/gas/dwarf2dbg.c
> > > > index e4ba56d82ba..c0c09f4e9d0 100644
> > > > --- a/gas/dwarf2dbg.c
> > > > +++ b/gas/dwarf2dbg.c
> > > > @@ -2626,7 +2626,7 @@ dwarf2_init (void)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  /* Finish the dwarf2 debug sections.  We emit .debug.line if there
> > > > -   were any .file/.loc directives, or --gdwarf2 was given, or if the
> > > > +   were any .file/.loc directives, or --gdwarf2 was given, and if the
> > > >     file has a non-empty .debug_info section and an empty .debug_line
> > > >     section.  If we emit .debug_line, and the .debug_info section is
> > > >     empty, we also emit .debug_info, .debug_aranges and .debug_abbrev.
> > > > @@ -2650,9 +2650,16 @@ dwarf2_finish (void)
> > > >    empty_debug_line = line_seg == NULL || !seg_not_empty_p (line_seg);
> > > >
> > > >    /* We can't construct a new debug_line section if we already have one.
> > > > -     Give an error.  */
> > > > +     Give an error if we have seen any .loc, otherwise trust the user
> > > > +     knows what they are doing and want to generate the .debug_line
> > > > +     (and all other debug sections) themselves.  */
> > > >    if (all_segs && !empty_debug_line)
> > > > -    as_fatal ("duplicate .debug_line sections");
> > > > +    {
> > > > +      if (dwarf2_loc_directive_seen)
> > > > +       as_fatal ("duplicate .debug_line sections");
> > > > +      else
> > > > +       return;
> > > > +    }
> > > >
> > > >    if ((!all_segs && emit_other_sections)
> > > >        || (!emit_other_sections && !empty_debug_line))
> > >
> > > I have run into this issue before.  "as -g" shouldn't silently
> > > generate incorrect debug info when input assembly codes already
> > > contain debug directives.  AS should either issue an error or
> > > ignore -g.
> >
> > Right, that is what this patch does for .debug_line.  gas already
> > doesn't generate .debug_info, .debug_aranges and .debug_abbrev if
> > .debug_info is non-empty, even if -g is given.
> >
> > > In either case, we need a testcase  to verify it.
> >
> > Right, and the documentation needs to be update.  But first we have to
> > know whether the gas maintainers think this is the right approach.
> 
> -g should be ignored in this case.

I am not sure what you mean by "in this case", or what precisely it
means to "ignore -g".

My proposal, and what my strawman patch implements, is that gas will
generate a .debug_line section when -g is given and the debug types is
DWARF (just as it does now). Unless there is a non-empty .debug_line
section already created by the input assembly and the input assembly
does not contain any .loc directive then gas will not try to generate
a .debug_line section itself but leaves the non-empty .debug_line as
is (currently gas will generate an error in this case). But if the
input assembly does contain both .loc directives and creates a
non-empty .debug line section gas will still generate an error (as it
does now, whether or not the input assembly contains any .loc
directives).

Does this sound sane?

Thanks,

Mark


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list