JDevlieghere added a comment. In D90598#2368826 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D90598#2368826>, @dblaikie wrote:
> In D90598#2368020 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D90598#2368020>, @labath wrote: > >> Judging by >> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-October/145990.html, dsymutil >> has a similar bug... > > That's my understanding. It means I'm not sure (though I'm not the expert > here - certainly leave final decisions up to @aprantl and @JDevlieghere ) how > this will be fixed, since lldb will presumably still need to be able to > parse/understand old dsyms using the incorrect absolute offsets. (we had a > similar problem once with DW_OP_bit_piece, where it was implemented > incorrectly in both LLVM and lldb and I'm not sure how the backwards > compatibility story was addressed there). I think @aprantl has proposed this in the past, but we should make `dsymutil` convert `DW_OP_convert` to `DW_OP_LLVM_convert` in its output. I also don't have a good plan for backward compatibility. If there was a way we could "know" that the DWARF came from a dSYM we could continue to support the old behavior knowing that it has always been wrong, but I'm not aware of anything like that in LLDB and I'm also not sure that's something I'd like to have in the first place... Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D90598/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D90598 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
