[LLDB] Fix handling of bit-fields when there is a base class when parsing DWARF

When parsing DWARF and laying out bit-fields we currently don't take into account whether we have a base class or not.
Currently if the first field is a bit-field but the bit offset is due a field we inherit from a base class we currently
treat it as an unnamed bit-field and therefore add an extra field.

This fix will not check if we have a base class and assume that this offset is due to members we are inheriting from the base.
We are currently seeing asserts during codegen when debugging clang::DiagnosticOptions.

This assumption will fail in the case where the first field in the derived class in an unnamed bit-field. Fixing the first field
being an unnamed bit-field looks like it will require a larger change since we will need a way to track or discover the last field offset of the bases(s).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76808

diff --git a/lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp b/lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp
index 8838888..760933b 100644 (file)
--- a/lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp
@@ -2668,9 +2668,19 @@ void DWARFASTParserClang::ParseSingleMember(
               }
 
               // If we have a gap between the last_field_end and the current
-              // field we have an unnamed bit-field
+              // field we have an unnamed bit-field.
+              // If we have a base class, we assume there is no unnamed
+              // bit-field if this is the first field since the gap can be
+              // attributed to the members from the base class. This assumption
+              // is not correct if the first field of the derived class is
+              // indeed an unnamed bit-field. We currently do not have the
+              // machinary to track the offset of the last field of classes we
+              // have seen before, so we are not handling this case.
               if (this_field_info.bit_offset != last_field_end &&
-                  !(this_field_info.bit_offset < last_field_end)) {
+                  this_field_info.bit_offset > last_field_end &&
+                  !(last_field_info.bit_offset == 0 &&
+                    last_field_info.bit_size == 0 &&
+                    layout_info.base_offsets.size() != 0)) {
                 unnamed_field_info = FieldInfo{};
                 unnamed_field_info->bit_size =
                     this_field_info.bit_offset - last_field_end;

diff --git a/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/TestCppBitfields.py b/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/TestCppBitfields.py
index 1b362e6..7320ce2 100644 (file)
--- a/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/TestCppBitfields.py
+++ b/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/TestCppBitfields.py
@@ -103,3 +103,10 @@ class CppBitfieldsTestCase(TestBase):
                    '(uint64_t:1) k = 1',
                 ])
 
+        self.expect(
+            "frame variable --show-types derived",
+            VARIABLES_DISPLAYED_CORRECTLY,
+            substrs=[
+                '(uint32_t) b_a = 2',
+                '(uint32_t:1) d_a = 1',
+                ])

diff --git a/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/main.cpp b/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/main.cpp
index e43bf8c..986b7cb 100644 (file)
--- a/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/main.cpp
+++ b/lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/bitfields/main.cpp
@@ -60,6 +60,16 @@ int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) {
     } 
   } clang_example;
 
+  class B {
+  public:
+    uint32_t b_a;
+  };
+
+  class D : public B {
+  public:
+    uint32_t d_a : 1;
+  } derived;
+
   lba.a = 2;
 
   lbb.a = 1;
@@ -76,6 +86,8 @@ int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) {
   lbd.arr[2] = '\0';
   lbd.a = 5;
 
+  derived.b_a = 2;
+  derived.d_a = 1;
 
   return 0; // Set break point at this line.
 }