Invalid `DW_AT_ranges` for some inlined functions

I am trying to wrap my head around something that looks pretty much like corrupt `DW_AT_ranges` for some `inlined_subroutine`s.

I have a few examples here, they might be a bit random, but I was trying to gather a few examples of how the ranges are broken:

A "simple" case where things go wrong, a range going backwards:
```

0x00765086: DW_TAG_subprogram
DW_AT_low_pc (0x0009c6e0)
DW_AT_high_pc (0x0009c985)

0x00765164: DW_TAG_lexical_block
DW_AT_ranges (0x0005e420
[0x0009c7e2, 0x0009c8a5)
[0x00000000, 0x00000001))

0x0076517a: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_ranges (0x0005e3f0
[0x0009c7e2, 0x0009c7e0)
[0x0009c88f, 0x0009c8a2))
```

One range going backwards, the other one outside of its parent.

```
0x03185676: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_low_pc (0x00509208)
DW_AT_high_pc (0x00509218)

0x0318569a: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_ranges (0x0020e268
[0x00509208, 0x00509204)
[0x00509207, 0x00509218))
```

Two overlapping ranges, which add up to the parent range (not sure this is actually invalid, but definitely weird), they also go out of bounds of the parent:

```

0x0308291c: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_low_pc (0x004f0aa8)
DW_AT_high_pc (0x004f0aac)

0x03082936: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_ranges (0x00206768
[0x004f0aa8, 0x004f0aab)
[0x004f0aa1, 0x004f0aac))
```

This seems like two sibling DIEs, the first has again, a backwards going range, and another one that goes out of bounds of its parent `DW_TAG_lexical_block`. Well at least the sibling seems to fit neatly into the gap between the first two ranges (though the second one goes backwards).

```

0x00a3dc2c: DW_TAG_lexical_block
DW_AT_low_pc (0x000f3b44)
DW_AT_high_pc (0x000f3bb8)

0x00a3dc61: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_ranges (0x000915d0
[0x000f3b44, 0x000f3b46)
[0x000f3b4b, 0x000f3b3f)
[0x000f3b42, 0x000f3b52))

0x00a3dc86: DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
DW_AT_low_pc (0x000f3b46)
DW_AT_high_pc (0x000f3b4b)
```