This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: read_structure_type and virtual base types


I've actually run into the same problem:

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2004-12/msg00074.html

You should probably talk to David Moore since you work for Intel as well. I ran into him at the gcc summit and he asked me to follow up on it with him. I've got a PR submitted about this since icc is supposed to be gcc compatable. It's Intel issue #281637.

For what it's worth, I just worked around it by checking for null and just skipping the dereference. All that happens is you see a little less info about the class than you would otherwise.

cheers,

Kris

Thomson, Patrick S wrote:

Howdy Folks,

I'm attempting to use gdb 6.3 on an executable generated from the latest intel c++ compiler (9.0). That particular compiler does not generate child DIE information for member functions which are declared but not implemented. If the class is a derived class and I try to print an instantiated object of that class, gdb crashes.

I tracked what I think is the issue to dwarf2read.c::read_structure_type().

At line read_structure_type()+119 we set TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE(type), but only if we have 1 or more member functions (see line read_structure_type()+107 for fi.nfnfields test, this field is set at line read_structure_type()+94).

Because I have no child DIEs for member functions, TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE remains 0, and I crash later on because this is eventually dereferenced. Enough other data remains in the type structure to indicate that the class is a derived class, so gdb expects TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE(type) to be set.

Since g++ does output the child die, this isn't generally a problem. Ultimately my question is this: Is there a reason why the logic is structured the way it is, and what is it? I can fix it easily enough in my local copy by moving the closing brace for the 'if(fi.nfnfields){}' block so that it doesn't encompass the DW_AT_containing_type attribute test a few lines later, but I'm not sure what the consequences would be.

Thanks!
Pat Thomson
Intel Corporation

p.s. example class with associated DWARF DIE

class A : virtual public V{
   int a;
   int aa;
public:
   void af(int); // declared, not implmented
};

Has the following DIE
<1><b64>: Abbrev Number: 17 (DW_TAG_class_type)
DW_AT_decl_line : 11
DW_AT_decl_column : 7
DW_AT_decl_file : 1
DW_AT_accessibility: 1 (public)
DW_AT_byte_size : 20
DW_AT_name : A
DW_AT_containing_type: <b64>
<2><b70>: Abbrev Number: 18 (DW_TAG_inheritance)
DW_AT_decl_line : 11
DW_AT_decl_column : 26
DW_AT_decl_file : 1
DW_AT_accessibility: 1 (public)
DW_AT_data_member_location: 7 byte block: 12 6 10 c 1c 6 22
(DW_OP_dup; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_constu: 12; DW_OP_minus; DW_OP_deref;
DW_OP_plus)
DW_AT_type : <a75>
DW_AT_virtuality : 1 (virtual)
<2><b82>: Abbrev Number: 19 (DW_TAG_member)
DW_AT_name : _vptr.A
DW_AT_data_member_location: 2 byte block: 23 0
(DW_OP_plus_uconst: 0)
DW_AT_artificial : 1
DW_AT_type : <baf>
<2><b93>: Abbrev Number: 3 (DW_TAG_member)
DW_AT_decl_line : 12
DW_AT_decl_column : 9
DW_AT_decl_file : 1
DW_AT_data_member_location: 2 byte block: 23 4
(DW_OP_plus_uconst: 4)
DW_AT_name : a
DW_AT_type : <ab0>
<2><ba0>: Abbrev Number: 3 (DW_TAG_member)
DW_AT_decl_line : 13
DW_AT_decl_column : 9
DW_AT_decl_file : 1
DW_AT_data_member_location: 2 byte block: 23 8
(DW_OP_plus_uconst: 8)
DW_AT_name : aa
DW_AT_type : <ab0>



-- Stay up-to-date on all the QNX news! Register at http://www.qnx.com/news/forms/newsletter.html to receive our newsletter.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]