On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Conrad Rad <cse.cem(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Mark Wielaard <mjw(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 10:46:52AM -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
> How about the attached patch? (I haven't yet looked at the MIPS issue,
> but think it reasonable to require the producer to add an explicit
> DW_AT_byte_size if the assumption of address size is not correct.)
On my repro, it fixes the pointer member, but not the array-of-pointer member.
Oh, wow, I misread. No, that's wrong.
struct b {
char *d;
void *e[3];
...
};
$ ./repro a.out:
...
agg_size(b. (type ) d): 8, 0xffffffff
This should be 0, 0x8. The size goes in the *size, return value of
dwarf_aggregate_size() should be zero on success, not 8. The patch is
not good as is.
Thanks,
Conrad