On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Cary Coutant <ccout...@google.com> wrote:
>> @@ -22385,21 +22448,21 @@
>> static void
>> output_indirect_strings (void)
>> {
>> + switch_to_section (debug_str_section);
>> if (!dwarf_split_debug_info)
>> - {
>> - switch_to_section (debug_str_section);
>> - htab_traverse (debug_str_hash, output_indirect_string, NULL);
>> - }
>> + htab_traverse (debug_str_hash, output_indirect_string, NULL);
>> else
>> {
>> unsigned int offset = 0;
>> unsigned int cur_idx = 0;
>>
>> + htab_traverse (skeleton_debug_str_hash, output_indirect_string, NULL);
>> +
>> switch_to_section (debug_str_offsets_section);
>> htab_traverse_noresize (debug_str_hash,
>> output_index_string_offset,
>> &offset);
>> - switch_to_section (debug_str_section);
>> + switch_to_section (debug_str_dwo_section);
>> htab_traverse_noresize (debug_str_hash,
>> output_index_string,
>> &cur_idx);
>
> Doesn't this routine now need to check to see if debug_str_hash and
> skeleton_debug_str_hash are non-NULL individually? It gets called if
> either is non-NULL, but what will happen if only one is NULL?Ahh, good catch. Fixed as attached. Sterling
patch.diff
Description: Binary data
