dblaikie added a comment. In D96778#2565677 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96778#2565677>, @jankratochvil wrote:
> In D96778#2565414 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96778#2565414>, @werat wrote: > >> I can't claim I fully understand what's the difference here, but this aligns >> with your comment at https://reviews.llvm.org/D92643#inline-900717 :) > > If interested the problem was `DWARFAttributes` can contain attributes > collected from multiple DIEs (linked by `DW_AT_specification` or > `DW_AT_abstract_origin`). And with (future) DWZ patchset applied for LLDB > such DIEs can come from multiple CUs. Therefore it is not enough to assume > each attribute comes from CU of the original DIE. > > Without DWZ it is sure not a bug. And DWZ is not yet in LLDB. As @labath mentioned, certainly there's some support in LLDB for cross-CU references, as LLVM produces these when performing LTO. I expect it'd be good to have a test case showing the sort of DWARF that DWZ produces for cross-CU references of enumerators. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96778/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96778 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
