This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
elf.c special_sections: missing .debug_<dwarf> sections?
- From: dje at google dot com
- To: binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 12:19:40 -0700
- Subject: elf.c special_sections: missing .debug_<dwarf> sections?
Hi.
While debugging binutils/14662 I found this:
static const struct bfd_elf_special_section special_sections_d[] =
{
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".data"), -2, SHT_PROGBITS, SHF_ALLOC + SHF_WRITE },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".data1"), 0, SHT_PROGBITS, SHF_ALLOC + SHF_WRITE },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".debug"), 0, SHT_PROGBITS, 0 },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".debug_line"), 0, SHT_PROGBITS, 0 },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".debug_info"), 0, SHT_PROGBITS, 0 },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".debug_abbrev"), 0, SHT_PROGBITS, 0 },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".debug_aranges"), 0, SHT_PROGBITS, 0 },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".dynamic"), 0, SHT_DYNAMIC, SHF_ALLOC },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".dynstr"), 0, SHT_STRTAB, SHF_ALLOC },
{ STRING_COMMA_LEN (".dynsym"), 0, SHT_DYNSYM, SHF_ALLOC },
{ NULL, 0, 0, 0, 0 }
};
There's a whole lot more DWARF sections than just those ones.
Perhaps this stuff is only used for assembler-written code,
and thus the absence of the other dwarf sections never manifests
itself in practice.
In that case it would at least be nice to add a comment explaining
why it's ok to elide the other sections (e.g., .debug_types).
What's the story here?