Add support for Dwarf5 as emitted by gcc-11.2 #69
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -15,13 +15,81 @@ | |
| struct OMFDirHeader; | ||
| struct OMFDirEntry; | ||
|
|
||
| typedef unsigned char byte; | ||
|
|
||
| struct SymbolInfo | ||
| { | ||
| int seg; | ||
| unsigned long off; | ||
| bool dllimport; | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| struct PESection | ||
| { | ||
| byte* base; | ||
| unsigned long length; | ||
| unsigned int secNo; | ||
|
|
||
| PESection() | ||
| : base(0) | ||
| , length(0) | ||
| , secNo(0) | ||
| { | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| byte* byteAt(unsigned int off) const | ||
| { | ||
| return base + off; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| byte* startByte() const | ||
| { | ||
| return byteAt(0); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| byte* endByte() const | ||
| { | ||
| return byteAt(0) + length; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| bool isPresent() const | ||
| { | ||
| return base && length; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| bool isPtrInside(const void *p) const | ||
| { | ||
| auto pInt = (uintptr_t)p; | ||
| return (pInt >= (uintptr_t)base && pInt < (uintptr_t)base + length); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| unsigned int sectOff(void *p) const | ||
| { | ||
| return (unsigned int)((uintptr_t)p - (uintptr_t)base); | ||
| } | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| // Define the list of interesting PE sections in one place so that we can | ||
| // generate definitions needed to populate our pointers and reference each | ||
| // section. | ||
|
|
||
| #define SECTION_LIST() \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_addr) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_info) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_abbrev) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_line) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_line_str) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_frame) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_str) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_str_offsets) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_loc) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_loclists) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_ranges) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(debug_rnglists) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(reloc) \ | ||
| EXPANDSEC(text) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| #define IMGHDR(x) (hdr32 ? hdr32->x : hdr64->x) | ||
|
|
||
| class PEImage : public LastError | ||
|
|
@@ -70,14 +138,15 @@ class PEImage : public LastError | |
| bool save(const TCHAR* oname); | ||
|
|
||
| bool replaceDebugSection (const void* data, int datalen, bool initCV); | ||
| void initSec(PESection& peSec, int secNo) const; | ||
| bool initCVPtr(bool initDbgDir); | ||
| bool initDbgPtr(bool initDbgDir); | ||
| bool initDWARFPtr(bool initDbgDir); | ||
| bool initDWARFObject(); | ||
| void initDWARFSegments(); | ||
| bool relocateDebugLineInfo(unsigned int img_base); | ||
|
|
||
| bool hasDWARF() const { return debug_line.isPresent(); } | ||
| bool isX64() const { return x64; } | ||
| bool isDBG() const { return dbgfile; } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -131,23 +200,30 @@ class PEImage : public LastError | |
|
|
||
| public: | ||
| //dwarf | ||
| #define EXPANDSEC(name) PESection name; | ||
| SECTION_LIST() | ||
| #undef EXPANDSEC | ||
|
|
||
| int cv_base; | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| struct SectionDescriptor { | ||
| const char *name; | ||
| PESection PEImage::* pSec; | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| #define EXPANDSEC(name) constexpr SectionDescriptor sec_desc_##name { "." #name, &PEImage::name }; | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. cv2pdb is also compiled with Visual D, see https://ci.appveyor.com/project/rainers/visuald. The CI still uses VS2017, I'm not sure how well this works with There was a problem hiding this comment. I just tested all the way back to VS2015 and this usage of constexpr is supported back there: Do you still want me to remove it? There was a problem hiding this comment. Thanks for verifying that it works in older VS, too. No need to change it then. |
||
| SECTION_LIST() | ||
| #undef EXPANDSEC | ||
|
|
||
| constexpr const SectionDescriptor *sec_descriptors[] = | ||
| { | ||
| #define EXPANDSEC(name) &sec_desc_##name, | ||
| SECTION_LIST() | ||
| #undef EXPANDSEC | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| #undef SECTION_LIST | ||
|
|
||
| #endif //__PEIMAGE_H__ | ||
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As mentioned in #68 (review), I like to review PRs commit by commit, and if there is too much in one single commit, it is easy for bugs to hide. I did not find any bug in this, but I would not be surprised if I missed any because of the different goals of this commit: dropping
debug_arangesand friends, refactoringPESections, adding new ones, dropping commented-out code, adding debugging, etc ;-)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I understand your concern. I was mainly aiming here for a testable chunk which shouldn't introduce functional changes.
I have a different philosophy about code review: it's really only worthwhile for architectural analysis and for suggesting ways to improve the readability or understandability of code. For bugs, however, tests are the gold standard. Especially for code like this where an off-by-one error or subtle spec misreading can lead to wildly different results. I think we've seen over the decades that the "thousand eyes make bugs shallow" idea doesn't really work in practice.