[Dwarf-Discuss] question about [0x0..0xffffffff] location list entry
roland at redhat.com
Thu Jan 20 10:29:18 PST 2011
> DWARF does not mention overflow in address computations.
> (Not that there is an address computation here.) Nor does
> it mention address ranges wrapping.
There are indeed two address computations here: adding the base address to
each of the two addresses in the location list entry. I think it would be
helpful for DWARF to say explicitly that such calculations should not
overflow/wrap. That is, if the base address plus a list entry address
exceeds the maximum address representable by the CU's address_size (as in
this example), the list entry is invalid.
More information about the Dwarf-Discuss