[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D138618: [LLDB] Enable 64 bit debug/type offset

Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Feb 3 04:04:15 PST 2023


labath added a comment.

In D138618#4094933 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D138618#4094933>, @clayborg wrote:

>> - My main source of frustration was that my concern is getting overlooked/ignored (not necessarily your fault -- I've been told I am not always sufficiently clear). I think that is something we could live with, if we thing the other cleanups in this patch are worth it (which could very well be the case) -- however, I would want us to be clear that's what we're doing.
>
> I do want to state that if we fix things the way I describe it will work seamlessly with OSO or DWO files. The current state of things is the DWO stuff only uses the fancy DIERef constructor and fills in the dwo number correctly only to have it overwritten in SymbolFile::GetUID(...). The SymbolFile::GetUID(...) is needed for OSOs currently because the DIERef that SymbolFileDWARF (which is used for OSO) doesn't correctly create DIERef objects since they always return llvm::None for SymbolFileDWARF::GetDwoNum(). But the new API will have SymbolFileDWARF::GetFileIndex() to be used instead of SymbolFileDWARF::GetDwoNum(), and the file index will be set correctly for both DWO and OSO files. We can then change DIERef away from DWO specific naming, and have DIERef have a "m_file_index" and "m_file_index_valid" instead of the dwo specific members. As long as both OSO and DWO files can be found from the user_id_t API calls we are all good. Not sure if this addresses all of your issues or not.
>
> If all of your concerns are not clarified above, can you clarify what is still being overlooked? Both Alexander and I are usually thinking we are addressing everything you want, but we obviously still aren't, so restating your remaining concerns would help us get this patch moving.

Everything is clarified is and fine. I agree with your plan Thanks. I was trying to return the favor and clarify my own (potentially rude) responses.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D138618/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D138618



More information about the lldb-commits mailing list