From jdevlieghere@apple.com  Mon Oct  9 19:50:58 2017
From: jdevlieghere@apple.com (Jonas Devlieghere)
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 20:50:58 +0100
Subject: [Dwarf-Discuss] Legal top-level units
Message-ID: <C90015D3-122F-4EA2-98E5-6C92B4EC694C@apple.com>

Hi everyone,

For the verifier in llvm-dwarfdump I?m trying to find out what unit types are valid top-level units, following the CU header. 

The DW_TAG_compile_unit, DW_TAG_type_unit and DW_TAG_partial_unit are pretty obviously legal, but what I?m not sure about are DW_TAG_skeleton_unit and DW_TAG_imported_unit? 

Thanks,
Jonas


From ron.brender@gmail.com  Mon Oct  9 20:47:39 2017
From: ron.brender@gmail.com (Ron Brender)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 16:47:39 -0400
Subject: [Dwarf-Discuss] Legal top-level units
In-Reply-To: <C90015D3-122F-4EA2-98E5-6C92B4EC694C@apple.com>
References: <C90015D3-122F-4EA2-98E5-6C92B4EC694C@apple.com>
Message-ID: <CANSbVTiuctsaaq_zoP2=FgM_tTxHVVL5htmaHWc5C77dBdFBFg@mail.gmail.com>

DW_TAG_skeleton_unit -- yes. It will be the only DIE in the compilation.
DW_TAG_imported_unit -- no. Importing another separate unit to be a new
separate unit makes no sense,

Ron

On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Jonas Devlieghere <jdevlieghere at apple.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> For the verifier in llvm-dwarfdump I?m trying to find out what unit types
> are valid top-level units, following the CU header.
>
> The DW_TAG_compile_unit, DW_TAG_type_unit and DW_TAG_partial_unit are
> pretty obviously legal, but what I?m not sure about are
> DW_TAG_skeleton_unit and DW_TAG_imported_unit?
>
> Thanks,
> Jonas
> _______________________________________________
> Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
> Dwarf-Discuss at lists.dwarfstd.org
> http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org/attachments/20171009/d987f9f6/attachment-0001.html>


From jdevlieghere@apple.com  Tue Oct 10 09:20:03 2017
From: jdevlieghere@apple.com (Jonas Devlieghere)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:20:03 +0100
Subject: [Dwarf-Discuss] Legal top-level units
In-Reply-To: <CANSbVTiuctsaaq_zoP2=FgM_tTxHVVL5htmaHWc5C77dBdFBFg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <C90015D3-122F-4EA2-98E5-6C92B4EC694C@apple.com>
 <CANSbVTiuctsaaq_zoP2=FgM_tTxHVVL5htmaHWc5C77dBdFBFg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E63386F0-2D3D-4B16-A2EB-523E5070F198@apple.com>


> On 9 Oct 2017, at 21:47, Ron Brender <ron.brender at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> DW_TAG_skeleton_unit -- yes. It will be the only DIE in the compilation.
> DW_TAG_imported_unit -- no. Importing another separate unit to be a new separate unit makes no sense,
> 
> Ron

Thanks Ron!

> 
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Jonas Devlieghere <jdevlieghere at apple.com <mailto:jdevlieghere at apple.com>> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> For the verifier in llvm-dwarfdump I?m trying to find out what unit types are valid top-level units, following the CU header.
> 
> The DW_TAG_compile_unit, DW_TAG_type_unit and DW_TAG_partial_unit are pretty obviously legal, but what I?m not sure about are DW_TAG_skeleton_unit and DW_TAG_imported_unit?
> 
> Thanks,
> Jonas
> _______________________________________________
> Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
> Dwarf-Discuss at lists.dwarfstd.org <mailto:Dwarf-Discuss at lists.dwarfstd.org>
> http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org <http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org>
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org/attachments/20171010/d8fb58b4/attachment-0001.html>


