[libunwind] Re: dwarf fixes: searching the table in eh_frame_hdr

[David Mosberger]

>>>>> On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:53:48 -0700, Max Asbock <address@hidden> said:

  Max> The original code allows DW_EH_PE_sdata4 for 4 byte pointer
  Max> sizes and DW_EH_PE_sdata8 for 8 byte pointer sizes. This would
  Max> exclude x86_64.

Ah, yes, of course.  I see the problem now.

  >> There must be something else that's wrong here.  In fact, the new
  >> code in the patch seems definitely bogus:

  >> + if (!hdr->table_enc == (DW_EH_PE_datarel | DW_EH_PE_sdata4))

  >> why complementing hdr->table_enc here?

  Max> Yes this is bogus. It was meant to allow only (DW_EH_PE_daterel
  Max> | DW_EH_PE_sdata4) since that's what the implementation in the
  Max> patch allows.

OK, I think that's fine then.  I think all 64-bit DWARF2 targets
currently use 32-bit tables, so limiting the entries to 32 bits should
be sufficient for a while.  If and when there is a need for adding
64-bit tables, we can add the necessary routines to
Gfind_proc_info-lsb.c at that point.

What's up with the start_ip_offset -> start_ip renaming?  Is this just
for shortening the names or is there a deeper reason?

        --david