clayborg wrote: > What's an actual test case for this issue? The example given above doesn't > look like it'd produce entries for the declaration of ios_base? Like here's > something that looks equivalent, but is complete, and doesn't have a > DW_IDX_parent on the nested typedef entry in the index: > https://godbolt.org/z/efjbze3x1 > > it'd be good to have a reproducer for this to motivate the discussion...
I will see what I can do to repro with a minimal test case. But I do believe that this PR should go in as right now we have binaries with thousands of entries that are being found from the top down from a name entry and causes tons of bogus type resolving lookups to happen. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91808 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
