https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30047
Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #14633|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org> ---
Created attachment 14657
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14657&action=edit
backends: Handle DW_TAG_unspecified_type in dwarf_peeled_die_type
(In reply to Martin Liska from comment #5)
> May I please ping this issue as one needs it with the latest binutils
> release (2.40).
Yes, thanks. I didn't forget, but I changed my mind how to best handle this
issue.
See the new patch. This changes the code so that an DW_TAG_unspecified_type is
treated just as if the function doesn't have a return type. I think that is a
better fix because there might be more code out there that uses
dwfl_module_return_value_location and might not handle an error in this case.
And there isn't actually much that can be done with an unspecified type, for
normal cases it is as if there is no return type.
I did adjust the testcase to show how you can see whether it is a missing
return type or an unspecified return type in case you program does care.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
