jwnhy added a comment.
In D147606#4246832 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147606#4246832>, @JDevlieghere
wrote:
> The change looks fine and regardless of whether this makes sense or even
> complies with the standard, we should be resilient against it. I would like
> to see a test though.
It seems that DWARFv5 indeed specifies how to deal with these empty ranges
> A bounded range entry whose beginning and ending address offsets are equal
> (including zero) indicates an empty range and may be ignored.
Also, I kind of searched through the codebase, and noticed that there are
multiple places like this, and they adapt a similar approach discarding those
empty ranges.
e.g. in `DWARFDebugRanges.cpp`
// Filter out empty ranges
if (begin < end)
range_list.Append(DWARFRangeList::Entry(begin + base_addr, end - begin));
}
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D147606/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D147606
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
