[Dwarf-Discuss] question about [0x0..0xffffffff] location list entry

[Roland McGrath]

> 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.


Thanks,
Roland