On 03/31/2011 07:35 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> redundant .loc directives. It seems to me that in the case of direct
> output (i.e when we the underlying assembler doesn't support the .loc
> directive) we already avoid the duplication. And that avoidance fixes
> the immediate issue GDB is facing,
Dodji
>From 87f97cc32bfac37264aa414c43d4ad47a9a35d72 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dodji Seketeli
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:56:20 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] PR debug/47471 (set prologue_end in .debug_line)
gcc/
* dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_source_line):
Avoid emitting redundant consecutive .
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 04:59:18 +0200, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 11:19 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> > First, it avoids emitting two consecutive .loc that are identical.
> > Strictly speaking that should fix this issue in this particular case.
>
> What's the compatibility strategy? I.e.
On 03/30/2011 11:19 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> First, it avoids emitting two consecutive .loc that are identical.
> Strictly speaking that should fix this issue in this particular case.
What's the compatibility strategy? I.e. how does gdb tell that we're
not using the double-loc mechanism? Does
11 16:56:20 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] PR debug/47471 (set prologue_end in .debug_line)
gcc/
* dwarf2out.c (output_source_line_asm_info): Split out of
dwarf2out_source_line. Add a new is_prologue_end parameter.
Avoid emitting redundant consecutive .loc asm direct
