This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [RFA] PATCH: finding a function with address


I wrote:

> Here's the scoop: many debug formats, including COFF, put NULL into
> SYMBOL_BFD_SECTION, see `prim_record_minimal_symbol' and all its
> callers.  This makes `lookup_minimal_symbol_by_pc_section' reject all
> symbols it finds, and come up empty handed.
> 
> Can someone who knows his/her way inside minsyms.c please suggest how
> to fix this?  It seems that in its current shape,
> `lookup_minimal_symbol_by_pc_section' is too harsh to quite a few
> platforms, so I think we'd better change that.  Would an additional
> test for SYMBOL_BFD_SECTION being non-NULL be okay, for example?

Well, since no one replied, I'm now turning this into RFA ;-)

The following patch allows targets where SYMBOL_BFD_SECTION is NULL,
in particular targets which use COFF debug info, to use "info symbol"
as advertised.

Okay to commit?

2001-02-07  Eli Zaretskii  <eliz@is.elta.co.il>

	* minsyms.c (lookup_minimal_symbol_by_pc_section): Don't skip
	symbols whose SYMBOL_BFD_SECTION is NULL.

--- gdb/minsyms.c~0	Fri Dec 15 03:01:48 2000
+++ gdb/minsyms.c	Wed Feb  7 20:29:38 2001
@@ -482,6 +482,10 @@ lookup_minimal_symbol_by_pc_section (COR
 	      /* This is the new code that distinguishes it from the old function */
 	      if (section)
 		while (hi >= 0
+		       /* Some types of debug info, such as COFF,
+			  don't fill the bfd_section member, so don't
+			  throw away symbols on those platforms.  */
+		       && SYMBOL_BFD_SECTION (&msymbol[hi]) != NULL
 		       && SYMBOL_BFD_SECTION (&msymbol[hi]) != section)
 		  --hi;
 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]