This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: Support DW_TAG_entry_point
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:
Jan> I guess the whole patch tagets just one compiler's (ifort's?) use
Jan> of DW_TAG_entry_point. DWARF standard also says neither that
Jan> DW_TAG_entry_point should be a child of DW_TAG_subprogram nor
Jan> that it should not have its own DW_AT_high_pc. Therefore
Jan> assuming DW_TAG_entry_point will be the first child DIE is
Jan> ensured for the target compiler this patch was made for.
Ok, I went and looked through DWARF 3 again to try to understand more.
I think this means that the compiler in question is emitting invalid
DWARF, or at least using its own extension. In that case I suppose I
would be more inclined to allow this, provided that it doesn't impact
the possibility of correctly implementing DW_TAG_entry_point in the
future (maybe the patch already does this too, I really don't know).
Assuming this is an extension, I would like a comment to that effect,
mentioning the compiler. A test case wouldn't hurt, either.
Tom