On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 2:47 PM Greg Clayton via Dwarf-Discuss
<dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:
>
> One simple approach would be to be able to represent a DW_AT_low_pc with a
> DW_FORM_data encoding just like the DW_AT_high_pc does when it is an offset
> from the DW_AT_low_pc.
I'm not sure this would catch all the desired cases/be especially tidy
to implement, unfortunately.
> The value of the DW_AT_low_pc would be an offset from either:
> 1 - the parent DIE's DW_AT_low_pc (which itself might need to be resolved by
> looking at the parent scope). If the parent DIE's range is a DW_AT_ranges,
> then use the lowest address out of all of them.
"lowest address in DW_AT_ranges" wouldn't be suitable when ranges are
used across sections (eg: some CU ranges - when functions are in
different sections due to inline functions or -ffunction-sections). If
everything was in one section then an implementation could use low_pc
to indicate a good base address even if they still needed DW_AT_ranges
(eg: void f1() { } __attribute__((nodebug)) void f2() { } void f3() {
} - or other cases where a single section with multiple hunks of debug
info could exist with holes in between) - but it's possible to have
that and ranges. eg:
// compiled without function sections, so f1 is in one section, but f2
and f3 are in a single section together, separate from f1
inline void f1() { }
void f2() { f1(); }
void f3() { }
the low_pc of f3 could benefit from using the same address (+offset)
as the low_pc of f2 - but there would be no clear way to indicate
which part of the CU's DW_AT_ranges could be used as the base address
for 'f3'.
> 2 - the first parent DIE with a DW_AT_low_pc that has a DW_FORM_addrXXX
> encoding.
Similar in the example above, 'f3' has no parent with a suitable
low_pc, but would benefit from sharing the same debug_addr entry as
'f2'.
A more extreme example happens in LLVM's prototype "Propeller" feature
- which essentially is "basic block sections" - where even a single
function may be fragmented across multiple sections and have no
specific ordering/scope based hierarchy about which base address to
use (so the function would have DW_AT_ranges, not just DW_AT_low/high
- and some internal scope could have a contiguous range and would want
to reuse one of the addresses used in DW_AT_ranges (+an offset from
it)).
- Dave
> Solution #1 is nice because it keeps the offset in the DW_FORM_data encoding
> small since it is always relative to the first parent scope's DW_AT_low_pc.
> So this could save a lot of space in the DWARF if we use the smallest
> possible DW_FORM_data encoding all the time.
> Solution #2 could be easier as you would traverse parent scopes looking for
> an address encoding as the DW_FORM.
>
> This would allow DW_TAG_subprogram DIEs to have a single relocation on the
> DW_AT_low_pc.
>
> Greg Clayton
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 2020, at 10:12 AM, Robinson, Paul via Dwarf-Discuss
> > <dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:
> >
> > David Blaikie has brought this up with me (or in conversations that
> > I observed) a couple of times:
> >
> > It's common to want to refer to a particular address plus an offset,
> > for example for DW_AT_low_pc or DW_AT_ranges to describe a lexical
> > block or inlined subprogram within another subprogram. Generally
> > the only symbolic address available is the entry point of the
> > containing subprogram. Back when addresses were held directly in
> > the .debug_info section, the attributes would have relocations, the
> > offset would be encoded into the relocation and the linker would
> > just do the right thing.
> >
> > With DWARF v5, we now have the .debug_addr section, which contains
> > the addresses to be fixed up by the linker. But, we don't have a
> > way to specify an offset to add to an entry in the .debug_addr
> > section; instead, each unique addr+offset requires its own entry
> > in the .debug_addr table. This consumes additional space, these
> > entries are generally not reusable, and it doesn't reduce the
> > overall number of relocations that the linker must process.
> >
> > It's not feasible to define a new attribute for address+offset,
> > because an attribute has only one value, and the attribute would
> > have to specify both the .debug_addr index and the offset to add.
> > But, we could define an "indirect" entry in .debug_addr, and then
> > reference it with an attribute in the same way that we reference
> > any other .debug_addr entry.
> >
> > An indirect entry would be the same size as all other entries in
> > .debug_addr (i.e., the size of an address on the target). The
> > upper half would be another index into .debug_addr and the lower
> > half would be the addend. The consumer adds the addend to the
> > value from the entry specified by the "another index."
> >
> > This solution doesn't save space in .debug_addr, but it does
> > reduce the number of relocations. Ideally .debug_addr would
> > require only one relocation per function.
> >
> > We can debate whether the addend should be signed or unsigned,
> > and whether the indirect entries should be a separate subtable,
> > but I wanted to float the idea here before I wrote it up as a
> > proposal.
> >
> > Alternatively, the indirect sub-table could be encoded with
> > ULEB/SLEB pairs, but that makes it hard to find them by index.
> > They could be found by a direct reference, but that requires a
> > relocation from .debug_info to .debug_addr, so we haven't saved
> > any relocations that way.
> >
> > If there are obvious flaws I can't see, or someone is inspired
> > to come up with another solution, please let me know! Otherwise
> > I'll write it up as a formal proposal probably later this week.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --paulr
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
> > Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
> > http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
> Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
> http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
_______________________________________________
Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
