From: brobecke <brobecke>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:08:10 +0000 (+0000)
Subject:         * dwarf2read.c (read_attribute_value): Treat size attribute
X-Git-Tag: cgen-snapshot-20091101~6388
X-Git-Url: http://git.osdn.net/view?a=commitdiff_plain;h=36bc4318f82e5f666a9b9052fb79da729fdf4b4c;p=pf3gnuchains%2Fpf3gnuchains4x.git

    * dwarf2read.c (read_attribute_value): Treat size attribute
        values of 0xffffffff as if the attribute value was zero.
---

diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog
index d5957ec886..e13a47a3cd 100644
--- a/gdb/ChangeLog
+++ b/gdb/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2008-06-26  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>
+
+	* dwarf2read.c (read_attribute_value): Treat size attribute
+	values of 0xffffffff as if the attribute value was zero.
+
 2008-06-26  Vladimir Prus  <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
 
 	* linux-nat.c: Add description of overall logic.
diff --git a/gdb/dwarf2read.c b/gdb/dwarf2read.c
index e36177afe0..9723ddd0d7 100644
--- a/gdb/dwarf2read.c
+++ b/gdb/dwarf2read.c
@@ -6234,6 +6234,18 @@ read_attribute_value (struct attribute *attr, unsigned form,
 	     dwarf_form_name (form),
 	     bfd_get_filename (abfd));
     }
+
+  /* We have seen instances where the compiler tried to emit a byte
+     size attribute of -1 which ended up being encoded as an unsigned
+     0xffffffff.  Although 0xffffffff is technically a valid size value,
+     an object of this size seems pretty unlikely so we can relatively
+     safely treat these cases as if the size attribute was invalid and
+     treat them as zero by default.  */
+  if (attr->name == DW_AT_byte_size
+      && form == DW_FORM_data4
+      && DW_UNSND (attr) >= 0xffffffff)
+    DW_UNSND (attr) = 0;
+
   return info_ptr;
 }