)]}'
{
  "commit": "ef56b006501ba52b128d4e5f36657ddbf56d22bc",
  "tree": "52579ec30401cb403f720e57c8840bd7b84e94a9",
  "parents": [
    "a500c3d8e0260a556d48c7d5ee2bc4212982dfe2"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Andrew Burgess",
    "email": "aburgess@redhat.com",
    "time": "Wed May 17 15:14:15 2023 +0100"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "Andrew Burgess",
    "email": "aburgess@redhat.com",
    "time": "Fri May 19 10:16:44 2023 +0100"
  },
  "message": "gdb/testsuite: test for a function with no line table\n\nThis commit adds a test for the following commit:\n\n  commit e86e87f77fd5d8afb3e714f1d9e09e0ff5b4e6ff\n  Date:   Tue Nov 28 16:23:32 2006 +0000\n\n              * symtab.c (find_pc_sect_line): Do not return a line before\n              the start of a symtab.\n\nWe have been carrying a test for that commit in the Fedora GDB tree\nsince that commit was added to GDB.  I don\u0027t know why the test wasn\u0027t\nadded along with the original commit, but as was written, the test is\npretty gross, it uses objcopy to pull the .text section from an object\nfile, which was then injected into another source file within a .asm\nstatement...\n\n... these days we can just make use of the DWARF assembler to achieve\nthe same results, so I\u0027ve rewritten the test and think it is worth\nadding this to upstream GDB.\n\nThe original patch was about about how we find the best symtab and\nline table entry, and what to do when GDB can\u0027t find a good match.\n\nThe new test creates a CU with two functions, only one of which is\ncovered by the line table.  With the above patch reverted GDB returns\nan invalid address.\n\nWith the above patch reverted I did run the testsuite to see what\nother tests might already be exercising this functionality, and I\nfound two tests:\n\n  gdb.dwarf2/dw2-step-out-of-function-no-stmt.exp\n  gdb.dwarf2/dw2-vendor-extended-opcode.exp\n\nThese are pretty similar, they either create minimal, or no line table\nfor one of the functions in the source file, and as a consequence GDB\nreturns an unexpected address at some point during the test.\n\nHowever, both of those tests are really focused on other issues, so I\nthink this new test does add some value.  Plus the new test is not\nlarge, so it\u0027s not a huge cost to also run this new test.\n\nReviewed-By: Tom Tromey \u003ctom@tromey.com\u003e\n",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "add",
      "old_id": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
      "old_mode": 0,
      "old_path": "/dev/null",
      "new_id": "656fa0687ef015d237fb6a8f1abd6fc0898872ec",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/missing-line-table.c"
    },
    {
      "type": "add",
      "old_id": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
      "old_mode": 0,
      "old_path": "/dev/null",
      "new_id": "a66d853726d512801af4fc6edfe3fc1e70dfe424",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/missing-line-table.exp"
    }
  ]
}