Hi Todd, The 64 bit ID of a DIE is built up in the following way: * The offset of the DIE is in the lower 32 bit * If we are using SymbolFileDWARF then the higher 32 bit is the offset of the compile unit this DIE belongs to * If we are using SymbolFileDWARFDwo then the higher 32 bit is the offset of the base compile unit in the parent SymbolFileDWARF * If we are using SymbolFileDWARFDebugMap then the higher 32 bit is the ID of the SymbolFileDWARF this DIE belongs to * If the higher 32 bit is 0 then that means that the source of the DIE isn't specified
The assert then tries to verify that one of the following conditions holds: * The higher 32 bit of "id" is 0 what means that we don't have a symbol file pointer (AFAIK shouldn't happen) or we are coming from a SymbolFileDWARF * The higher 32 bit of "cu_id" is 0 what means that the compile unit is at 0 offset what is the case for the single compile units in SymbolFileDWARFDwo (and I think for SymbolFileDWARFDebugMap) * The higher 32 bit of "id" (what is the ID of the SymbolFileDWARF we are belonging to) matches with the higher 32 bit of "cu_id" (what is the offset of the compile unit in the base object file) After thinking a bit more about the assert I think the problem is that the way I calculate cu_id is incompatible for the case when we are using SymbolFileDWARFDebugMap. I think changing line 188 to the following should fix the issue: lldb::user_id_t cu_id = m_cu->GetID()&0xffffffff00000000ull; Please give it a try on OSX and let me know if it helps. I tested it on Linux and it isn't cause any regression there. Thanks, Tamas On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:13 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Tamas, > > There is an assert in DWARFDIE.cpp (lines 189 - 191) that we're hitting on > the OS X side somewhat frequently nowadays: > > assert ((id&0xffffffff00000000ull) == 0 || > > (cu_id&0xffffffff00000000ll) == 0 || > > (id&0xffffffff00000000ull) == (cu_id& > 0xffffffff00000000ll)); > > > It does not seem to get hit consistently. We're trying to tease apart > what it is trying to do. It's a bit strange since it is saying that the > assert should not fire if any one of three clauses is true. But it's hard > to figure out what exactly is going on there. > > > Can you elucidate what this is trying to do? Thanks! > > -- > -Todd >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
