feat: Support GDB index by lapla-cogito · Pull Request #1990 · wild-linker/wild

lapla-cogito · 2026-05-27T11:20:16Z

This patch adds support for --gdb-index and --no-gdb-index. Although we support version 9 here, the test environment may produce a version 7 GDB index when using lld. This patch also adds a test that checks whether specific symbols are included in the symbol table of the .gdb_index section. Because of this requirement, the integration test includes logic to support versions earlier than version 9 as well.

Closes #811

lapla-cogito · 2026-05-27T11:51:26Z

+    fallback_cu: u32,
+    mut on_entry: impl FnMut(&'data [u8], u32),
+) {
+    for section_name in [".debug_gnu_pubnames", ".debug_gnu_pubtypes"] {


The symbol table construction assumes the presence of these two sections by adding the compiler flag -ggnu-pubnames (see the added integration test). Without these sections, the symbol table will not be built and only the CU list and address table will be constructed. This effectively means you won't benefit from GDB index, but since lld and mold behave this way, I've aligned the implementation.

Can we emit a warning to the user telling the option is leading to a GDB index result?

lapla-cogito · 2026-05-27T12:02:43Z

I did git commit --amend --allow-empty because the release workflow was triggered by the previous commit (which I canceled)...
https://github.com/wild-linker/wild/actions/runs/26509302406

I have no idea what happened... 🤷

marxin

Given the numerous findings I created - can you explain what was the genesis of the PR and how much was a LLM involved? I know we had a PR for the very same functionality that was closed right after it was opened. Is it an incarnation of the changes, or was it created completely independently?

marxin · 2026-05-27T19:47:22Z

+            4 + init_len as usize
+        };
+        if total == 0 || offset + total > data.len() {
+            break;


Shouldn't we rather report a warning as the emitted GDB index will be likely incomeplete/corrupted?

marxin · 2026-05-27T20:42:37Z

+
+    // Emit into the output buffer.
+    let total = cp_off as usize + cv_data.len() + str_data.len();
+    let len = buf.len().min(total);


This should be a hard error if the allocated buffer does not match the expected written data.

lapla-cogito · 2026-05-27T21:09:05Z

@marxin (I haven't seen the review details yet)

we had a PR for the very same functionality that was closed right after it was opened

I think you mean #1605. I used that as a reference when implementing this, since I had also reviewed it at the time and therefore already had some familiarity with the surrounding context and implementation details. However, I did not reuse it directly for licensing concerns (and in any case, it does not support version 9 as-is). I mainly used LLMs to help refine the implementation through review and iterative revisions.

marxin · 2026-05-28T03:28:46Z

I think you mean #1605. I used that as a reference when implementing this, since I had also reviewed it at the time and therefore already had some familiarity with the surrounding context and implementation details.

Yes - fine, that's a good approach you chose ;)

However, I did not reuse it directly for licensing concerns (and in any case, it does not support version 9 as-is). I mainly used LLMs to help refine the implementation through review and iterative revisions.

All good! Let's iterate on the PR, given you knowledge, I guess you can address the findings pretty fast. Happy to review and help you with the feature.

marxin · 2026-06-01T04:23:55Z

+        let (header_size, set_end, debug_info_offset) = if init_len == 0xFFFF_FFFF {
+            // DWARF64: 4 + 8(len) + 2(ver) + 8(offset) + 8(size) = 30
+            if pos + 30 > data.len() {
+                break;


I believe most of the breaks in the function should be actually replaced with an error handling instead.

As shown by this test failure, some toolchains don't generate strictly correct .debug_info. Therefore, both lld and mold are designed to be tolerant of such structures, so the original break approach should work well I think.

Well, I am not aligned with that: apparently it seems we're decoding a compress ZLIB stream, so our parsing logic is effectively hiding a real bug:

failures: elf/x86_64/gdb-index/enabled test result: FAILED. 0 passed; 1 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 1 filtered out; finished in 0.00s stderr ─── [libwild/src/gdb_index.rs:127:9] init_len = 1 [libwild/src/gdb_index.rs:137:9] (total, offset) = ( 5, 0, ) [libwild/src/gdb_index.rs:127:9] init_len = 3053453312 [libwild/src/gdb_index.rs:137:9] (total, offset) = ( 3053453316, 5, ) ... ❯ eu-readelf -zS ./wild/tests/build/elf/x86_64/gdb-index/enabled/gdb-index.c.o ... [ 5] .debug_info PROGBITS 0000000000000000 000000a0 0000007f 0 C 0 0 8 [ELF ZLIB (1) 000000b6 1] ... ./wild/tests/build/elf/x86_64/gdb-index/enabled/gdb-index.c.o: file format elf64-x86-64 .debug_info contents: 0x00000000: Compile Unit: length = 0x000000b2, format = DWARF32, version = 0x0005, unit_type = DW_UT_compile, abbr_offset = 0x0000, addr_size = 0x08 (next unit at 0x000000b6)

so the expected CU size is 0x000000b2. So please, let's start with a strict mode and we can then make an intensive testing if that's really the case. If so, then we have basically 2 options: not emitting the .gdbindex, or bail-out and provide an error message.

This reverts commit 638e550.

davidlattimore

I ran a quick benchmark to see what effect adding the flag --gdb-index has on the performance of the different linkers. With lld and mold, the performance difference between --gdb-index and --no-gdb-index was negligible. With wild however, it slows down linking by about 2x. Benchmark was with 32 threads linking zed.

I expect that the main problem is that there's lots of work being done single-threaded. e.g. iterating through all the objects. Also, looking up relevant sections by name is likely to be slow - as opposed to our usual approach where SectionRules determines what we should do with each input section.

davidlattimore · 2026-06-01T10:04:46Z

+                buf[so..so + HASH_SLOT_SIZE].copy_from_slice(new_slot.as_bytes());
+                break;
+            }
+            slot = (slot + step) & mask;


Do you think it'd be worthwhile asserting that we haven't gone back to the starting slot? In case we somehow allocated too few slots - it'd be better to crash that infinitely loop

davidlattimore · 2026-06-01T10:08:41Z

+}
+
+/// Pre-scan all input objects to compute the `.gdb_index` section size.
+pub(crate) fn compute_gdb_index_size(groups: &[GroupState<'_, Elf>]) -> Result<u64> {


Could do with a timing_phase here

davidlattimore · 2026-06-01T10:09:43Z

+fn scan_objects_for_gdb_index<'data>(
+    objects: impl Iterator<Item = (&'data crate::elf::File<'data>, &'data [SectionSlot])>,
+) -> Result<GdbIndexScanResult<'data>> {
+    let mut total_cus = 0usize;


Could do with a timing_phase here

davidlattimore · 2026-06-01T10:11:16Z

+        sorted_symbols: sorted_names,
+        ht_slots,
+        ..
+    } = scan_objects_for_gdb_index(objects)?;


I notice that this function is called twice. Is it expensive? If so, would it make sense to store the result from the first call?

marxin · 2026-06-01T18:53:19Z

After spending a little bit of time researching the area, I noticed there's a systematic DWARF extension Lookup by Name aka .debug_names (DWARF 5 6.1.1): https://dwarfstd.org/doc/DWARF5.pdf. It's pretty similar to .gdbindex, but supported by both lldb and gdb. Clang can emit the format with -g -gpubnames (can be dumped with llvm-dwarfdump --debug-names) and lld has an option that builds one global cache (--debug-names). Moreover, what's interesting, gdb itself can generate (and consume) the index format: gdb-add-index --dwarf-5. If I'm not mistaken, it's only GCC that lacks the support.

With that said, shouldn't the long-term, future-focused approach be to build out the Debug Names format rather than introducing an ad hoc, GDB-specific index file format?

lapla-cogito added 8 commits May 27, 2026 19:57

Add section name constant and part/section IDs

cdf84dd

Add --gdb-index and --no-gdb-index

ea7a302

Implement .gdb_index section generation

0e2139c

Update skip tests list

4bcb28a

Add integration tests

634c7cc

Eliminate duplicate parse_cu_boundaries in compute_gdb_index_size

9534ac8

Merge address and symbol table construction into single object scan

36fae04

clippy fix

66ffff8

lapla-cogito commented May 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

Extract shared pubnames/pubtypes iteration into a helper

aa288f0

lapla-cogito force-pushed the gdb_idx branch from e1c6be7 to aa288f0 Compare May 27, 2026 11:55

marxin requested changes May 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

lapla-cogito marked this pull request as draft May 27, 2026 21:30

lapla-cogito added 9 commits May 29, 2026 11:42

Use more idiomatic APIs and fix step calc

e3cc626

Calculate hashslots using zerocopy

31ff301

Add a comment for cv_bytes addition

ac5bbc4

Add consts for .debug_info

121674b

Write constant pool directly to output buffer

aef860f

Use itertools sorted_unstable_by_key()

b8f4da7

Unify object scannig logic

d9abf65

Refactor pubnames collection

9d099f3

Use BTreeSet for cv_entries

21b9dca

lapla-cogito force-pushed the gdb_idx branch from 2be7b41 to 21b9dca Compare May 29, 2026 17:19

lapla-cogito added 2 commits May 31, 2026 11:23

Improve error handling

55610bc

Use sorted_names rather than sorted as a variable name

9de1cc6

lapla-cogito force-pushed the gdb_idx branch from a848771 to 9de1cc6 Compare May 31, 2026 02:38

marxin reviewed Jun 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

lapla-cogito added 3 commits June 1, 2026 13:44

Emit errors when GDB indices are corrupted

638e550

Add some comments and warnings

fac7c23

Revert "Emit errors when GDB indices are corrupted"

70df43a

This reverts commit 638e550.

lapla-cogito marked this pull request as ready for review June 1, 2026 05:07

lapla-cogito requested a review from marxin June 1, 2026 05:07

Add a comment about CU

1aa313a

davidlattimore reviewed Jun 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

lapla-cogito commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lapla-cogito commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

marxin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lapla-cogito commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

marxin commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

marxin Jun 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

davidlattimore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

marxin commented Jun 1, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

marxin Jun 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading