search for: dw_form_flag

...# DW_CHILDREN_no .byte 3 # DW_AT_name .byte 8 # DW_FORM_string .byte 73 # DW_AT_type .byte 19 # DW_FORM_ref4 .byte 63 # DW_AT_external .byte 12 # DW_FORM_flag .byte 58 # DW_AT_decl_file .byte 11 # DW_FORM_data1 .byte 59 # DW_AT_decl_line .byte 11 # DW_FORM_data1 .byte 2 # DW_AT_location .byte 10 # DW_FORM_block1 .byte 0...

...o Dwarf 5, and the next GDB. The framework is a set of GCC like gdwarf[2,3,4,5] flags. I can see cases where compatibility is 2,3 or 2,3,4, so maybe the flag is a number to allow <=3 tests, have to sleep on that. This flag must go to the backend. Then the patch will change the conditional for DW_FORM_flag_present that caused the problem back to the old DW_FORM_flag when -gdwarf2 or 3 is set. In the future, there is a now a place to address compatibility issues that come up. ---- Monitoring this with GDB Testsuite as Jenkins or Buildbot would be a good idea. 20K+ tests are difficult to duplicate....

Rick Foos wrote: > The error we are getting is: > “Undefined Form Value: 25” > ... > DW_FORM_flag_present caused the problem. The old DW_FORM_flag works for us. I see this error from GDB 7.0 but GDB 7.2 is okay with it. Now you know as much as I do. :-) Eric Christopher wrote: > [in reply to what Renato Golin wrote:] > > With time, you might get to a point where Dwarf is a first-cla...

...ber TAG 1 DW_TAG_compile_unit [no children] DW_AT_producer DW_FORM_strp DW_AT_language DW_FORM_data2 DW_AT_name DW_FORM_strp DW_AT_low_pc DW_FORM_addr DW_AT_stmt_list DW_FORM_data4 DW_AT_comp_dir DW_FORM_strp Unknown AT value: 3fe1 DW_FORM_flag Unknown AT value: 3fe2 DW_FORM_strp I can't find other dwarf TAG in my object file. Is the metadata wrong? Or I loss some step when I generate metadata? If you need my pass's source. Please give me your mail. I will mail it for you. Thanks!!

> My GDB Testsuite runs have been failing more tests, and now an internal test > has started failing on some missing dwarf 3 records. What is the error message or the nature of the failures you are seeing ? Pranav Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

My GDB Testsuite runs have been failing more tests, and now an internal test has started failing on some missing dwarf 3 records. Changing compile flags to emit dwarf 2 didn't help. In the past there has been some effort to pass GDB Testsuite, including Dwarf 2 backwards compatibility. What is the plan/mechanism for maintaining Dwarf 2/3 compatibility? -- Rick Foos Qualcomm Innovation

> With time, you might get to a point where Dwarf is a first-class > citizen and there will be basic compatibility checks in "make check" > and a build bot for GDB test suite on some platforms, but to get > there, you'll go through a lot of pain. > Hopefully not too much. Paul has been helping and I add tests whenever I fix something, but a quality suite is something

...variety of debuggers, and we need to be able to preserve Dwarf3 compatibility. GDB, Lauterbach, etc. The patch that caused a problem for us is: https://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfCompileUnit.cpp?r1=162493&r2=162526&pathrev=162526&diff_format=h DW_FORM_flag_present caused the problem. The old DW_FORM_flag works for us. While the DD->useDarwinGDBCompat() option is a workaround in this case, Darwin GDB is a specific version of GDB. http://sourceware.org/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb/Darwin.html So useDarwinGDBCompat means Darwin GDB Compatibility, not GDB C...

On 17 October 2012 21:09, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: >> 1) What level of interest is there in Dwarf backward compatibility; > > I don't have a lot of interest in keeping dwarf backward compatibility > past my ability to test things, hence the option for darwin's gdb. Very few people have, and Dwarf is not an easy target, so the cost of having a

Dear LLVM devs, I've noticed that LLVM's assembler (and hence clang) doesn't generate debug data when assembling, even when run with "-g". Users can add their own CFI/line number data with assembler directives. But GDB ignores the line number data if you don't have a DIE in the .debug_info section which identifies the compilation unit. (I'm not an expert on GDB, but