[PATCH] D60470: [DWARF] Change ambiguity resolution from smallest CUOffset to largest (LowPC, CUOffset)

[Fangrui Song via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

MaskRay added a comment.

> So what I'm asking is: what happens if the right one isn't there (because that code wasn't built with debug info) - would we still get the wrong answer?

We still get the wrong answer. Say there is an invalid `[0, 0x201000)`. `[0x200100, 0x220000)` is part of the .text section but it isn't associated with a compile unit. When you resolve any address in `[0x200100, 0x201000)` (valid address ranges), it resolves to the invalid `[0, 0x201000)`. This is the status quo and this patch doesn't change it.

This is because the code doesn't know if a compile unit should be ignored or not. This patch just changes priority.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D60470/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D60470