On 05/18/2012 07:34 PM, saugust...@google.com wrote:
The motivation and new dwarf attributes and tags all stem from the debug
fission project as described at http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DebugFission.
Right. Not sure why I missed the pubtypes bits on that page before...
The code I removed doesn't deal with omitting individual entries.
Instead, it decides whether to emit the pubtypes section at all
Ah, yes, I see.
What are these attributes for? Is there a proposal to add them?
The entire motivation for this patch, including the proposed new
attributes is at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DebugFission
In particular, the section titled, "Building a GDB Index".
OK, I've read that section and I still don't understand why the consumer
would need a pointer from the CU to the pubnames section to build an
index. If we're looking for something by name, we go from pubnames to
the CU. If we're looking at the CU because we're in a function body,
presumably we need to parse most of it anyway; is there really a
significant benefit to having a separate "what names does this CU
define" attribute? The index is all name->die lookup, isn't it?
I'm also puzzled by what the proposal says about .debug_types. Why
would a pubtypes entry point to a CU that doesn't actually have a
definition of the type? Is it so that the consumer knows which .dwo to
look in? Perhaps we could do something else with the sig8 instead of
pointing to the wrong unit.
The DWARF standard says that pubnames is for names with global scope; this
change would add namespace-scope statics as well.
I am matching what gold and gdb do when building the gdb index.
Ah. If that's what GDB wants I guess it makes sense, but I'd like to
see reaction from the committee to this particular aspect. I haven't
noticed it come up in the committee discussion of Fission.
Why do we need pubtype entries for base types?
Same as above--to make these addable to the index, which in turn makes
gdb faster. I'll add this to the note to Cary.
Really? GDB wants to look up built-in types in the index rather than
just knowing what "int" means?
Why bypass the DECL_NAMELESS check?
So objects within anonymous namespaces get pubnames:
namespace { void some_function...
Hmm, it would give the anonymous namespace itself a pubname, but I don't
see how it would make any difference to objects within the namespace.
Jason
