dblaikie accepted this revision. dblaikie added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In D106466#2950268 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106466#2950268>, @jankratochvil wrote: > In D106466#2947710 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106466#2947710>, @dblaikie > wrote: > >> I assume there's already test coverage for rnglistx in debug_info.dwo/split >> unit? (because in that case there's no rnglists_base, but rnglistx is usable) > > I admit I did not check it, thanks for catching it. But it is already tested > by lldb/test/Shell/SymbolFile/DWARF/x86/debug_rnglists-dwo.s > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/f58a642da19c64cb6ee1badb0f176a872c1d7a0a/lldb/test/Shell/SymbolFile/DWARF/x86/debug_rnglists-dwo.s> > implemented by Pavel Labath in 2019 > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5ee8e673135891072789f0f9bf14a5d82f0f8e01>. > It is using DWO `DW_TAG_lexical_block->DW_AT_ranges->DW_FORM_rnglistx`. > >> - could you explain how this code avoids treating the split unit >> rnglists_base == 0 case as "there is no rnglists_base and so rnglistx isn't >> usable"? > > `m_ranges_base` is not zero in such case as it has been set from the skeleton > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/f58a642da19c64cb6ee1badb0f176a872c1d7a0a/lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFUnit.cpp#L105>. ah, OK - was going to say that setting it from the skeleton would be incorrect (for DWARF 5, at least) - but I see that's handled a few lines down: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/f58a642da19c64cb6ee1badb0f176a872c1d7a0a/lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFUnit.cpp#L110 Looks all good to me, then. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106466/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106466 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
