jankratochvil added a comment. There is some discussion what is valid vs. invalid DWARF-5 and whether DWARF-5 needs some updates: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99490 The planned change is that with this version of the patch `m_ranges_base` defauled to 0 but my idea for the 'planned change' was it should default to an invalid value (permitting `DW_FORM_sec_offset` but not `DW_FORM_rnglistx`). But then I found LLVM DWOs default to `llvm::DWARFListTableHeader::getHeaderSize(DWARF32)` which is nowhere stated in DWARF-5. And the GCC DWOs are somehow overall broken. So probably going to propose the LLVM behavior for DWARF-6. I will check the LLVM implementation, thanks for the hint.
Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D98289/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D98289 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
