On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:43 PM Jan Kratochvil via lldb-dev
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:25:05 +0100, Jan Kratochvil via lldb-dev wrote:
> > I think it is never needed in real world as long as one uses DWP and/or
> > -fdebug-types-section. Red Hat is using neither (for DWZ postprocessing)
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:25:05 +0100, Jan Kratochvil via lldb-dev wrote:
> I think it is never needed in real world as long as one uses DWP and/or
> -fdebug-types-section. Red Hat is using neither (for DWZ postprocessing) and
> so I did hit this limit of unsupported DWARF64 in GNU utilities
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 3:49 PM Adrian Prantl via lldb-dev
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>
> Given that:
>
> 1) LLVM doesn't produce DWARF64
> 2) GCC has to be patched to produce DWARF64
> 3) LLDB's support is only partial but is untested and appears to be
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>
> Given that:
>
> 1) LLVM doesn't produce DWARF64
> 2) GCC has to be patched to produce DWARF64
> 3) LLDB's support is only partial but is untested and appears to be missing
> major pieces in order for it to work
> 4) It's of
Given that:
1) LLVM doesn't produce DWARF64
2) GCC has to be patched to produce DWARF64
3) LLDB's support is only partial but is untested and appears to be missing
major pieces in order for it to work
4) It's of questionable use as there are several viable alternatives
Would it be reasonable to
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:45 PM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev
> wrote:
>
> I want to ask what the status of DWARF64 in LLDB is. I can tell there's some
> support for it by reading the code, but it seems to have zero test coverage
> so it's not clear to me that anyone depends on it. For
Thanks Jan,
That was my suspicion as well. If it's true that DWARF64 support is
currently non-functional, then I think the easiest path forward is to
remove any traces of it from LLDB as a way of bringing the two
implementations closer together.
I'll tinker around with this idea in a local
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 20:45:48 +0100, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev wrote:
> I want to ask what the status of DWARF64 in LLDB is.
IMO there isn't as for example:
lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DIERef.cpp
is using bits 32..63 for additional info (DWO file offset/index for example)
while only
I want to ask what the status of DWARF64 in LLDB is. I can tell there's
some support for it by reading the code, but it seems to have zero test
coverage so it's not clear to me that anyone depends on it. For example, I
know that clang and LLVM will not even generate DWARF64, so if anyone is
