On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 02:20:12PM -0800, Cary Coutant wrote:
> >> 2012-01-26 Cary Coutant
> >>
> >> * include/dwarf2.h (enum dwarf_form): Add Fission extensions.
> >> (enum dwarf_attribute): Likewise.
> >
> > This is ok.
>
> Thanks. I don't remember what the procedure is, though --
>> 2012-01-26 Cary Coutant
>>
>> * include/dwarf2.h (enum dwarf_form): Add Fission extensions.
>> (enum dwarf_attribute): Likewise.
>
> This is ok.
Thanks. I don't remember what the procedure is, though -- do I check
it in to both gcc and binutils trees, or just one and let it sync
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 02:04:59PM -0800, Cary Coutant wrote:
> 2012-01-26 Cary Coutant
>
> * include/dwarf2.h (enum dwarf_form): Add Fission extensions.
> (enum dwarf_attribute): Likewise.
This is ok.
> commit 0097fed73afa307f5cfc5de9cae0d3041f66193f
> Author: Cary Coutant
> Dat
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:18:24AM -0800, Cary Coutant wrote:
> FORM codes aren't added very often because they do break
> compatibility, so I wouldn't expect values in the 0x70-7f range to
> collide with any future standard FORM codes. I did want to keep them
> in the single-byte LEB128 range, alt
> If the DW_FORM_ values are meant to be in a vendor range of forms
> (which DWARF4 unfortunately doesn't have), aren't they too low, i.e. isn't
> there risk that eventually they'll clash with standard forms?
> The forms numbers aren't limited to 0 .. 0x7f, at the expense of a slightly
> bigger abb
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:54:26PM -0800, Cary Coutant wrote:
> I'd like to add these new DW_AT and DW_FORM codes for the Fission project:
>
>http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DebugFission
>
> We're currently working on the Fission implementation in GCC, gold,
> and binutils, but I'd like to at least l
