Re: [RFA]: Fix partial symbol lookups

[Daniel Berlin <dberlin at redhat dot com>]

"Peter.Schauer" <Peter.Schauer@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> writes:

> > Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > 
> > > Correct.
> > > But this never worked since 1994 anyway, since psymbols have no
> > > demangled name in them.
> > > :)
> > 
> > Good catch!  I too remember the comments that imply that
> > mangled names are in there, and have assumed they were true.
> 
> They were not true from 1994 - Dec 1998 and I should be blamed that I
> didn't remove the code and comment when I removed the demangling of 
> partial symbols back in 1994, my sincere apologies.
> 
> > > I also corrected lookup_partial_symbol to binary search the global
> > > table, regardless of language, since this is the part that had led me
> > > to believe it had demangled names in it in the first place. 
> > 
> > Are you SURE that NO language puts mangled names in?
> > If so, then this should be a big improvement.
> 
> I just double checked once again. 
> add_psymbol_to_list (which is used by most symbol readers) calls 
> SYMBOL_INIT_LANGUAGE_SPECIFIC (&psymbol, language), which sets the demangled
> name to NULL.
> 
> But wait, the HP patches reintroduced the demangling of partial symbols
> for their symbol reader (look for add_psymbol_with_dem_name_to_list).

This shouldn't make a difference, unless it's using the demangled name
as the symbol name, rather than using SYMBOL_INIT_DEMANGLED_NAME (IE
the right way is so the demangled name is the demangled name, the symbol name is the
mangled name)
> 
> This is really bad, as GDB now has to cope with the presence and non-presence
> of demangling in partial symbols. I'd be very reluctant to reintroduce
> the demangling of partial symbols for all other symbol readers, instead
> someone should fix the HP reader to not need the demangling of partial
> symbols.

It shouldn't.

> 
> I am now afraid that we have to back out all 2000-10-12 Dan Berlin changes,
> to get a reliably working (and perhaps sometimes slower) GDB again.
> 

No, we don't.
Unless they are using the demangled name as the symbol name, which is
incorrect anyway.
As long as they have the mangled name, it'll be found in a partial
symbol lookup just the same as it would be found elsewhere.
IE it won't find more or less symbols than it would using any other
debug format.


> -- 
> Peter Schauer			pes@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de