Hello, I have been facing a few problems getting names of variables from the bitcode. The bitcode does contain debug metadata. The first problem is regarding `memtmp' variables (apparently, the original variable name is no longer present in the bitcode). The other two problems concern OpenMP. In one case, the instruction is not named and hence establishing a connection to the debug metadata does not seem possible. In the other case, I am noticing some extra fields present in the `omp_data_s' structure (these fields are not present in the source code) and hence the `alloca' does not match the metadata definition. Here are the details: http://users.ices.utexas.edu/~ashay/tmp/llvm.html Does lldb have similar goals? If yes, which files should I be looking at? Any pointers are appreciated! Thanks! Ashay -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120229/844b11ef/attachment.html>
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Ashay Rane <ashay.rane at asu.edu> wrote:> Hello, > > I have been facing a few problems getting names of variables from the > bitcode. The bitcode does contain debug metadata. The first problem is > regarding `memtmp' variables (apparently, the original variable name is no > longer present in the bitcode).The other two problems concern OpenMP. In > one case, the instruction is not named and hence establishing a connection > to the debug metadata does not seem possible. In the other case, I am > noticing some extra fields present in the `omp_data_s' structure (these > fields are not present in the source code) and hence the `alloca' does not > match the metadata definition. > > Here are the details: > http://users.ices.utexas.edu/~ashay/tmp/llvm.html > > Does lldb have similar goals? If yes, which files should I be looking at?If debug information isn't there which you think should be, it's probably a frontend bug (in dragonegg, assuming you're using it). -Eli
Hi Ashay, which compiler are you using to produce the bitcode? Ciao, Duncan.> I have been facing a few problems getting names of variables from the bitcode. > The bitcode does contain debug metadata. The first problem is regarding `memtmp' > variables (apparently, the original variable name is no longer present in the > bitcode). The other two problems concern OpenMP. In one case, the instruction is > not named and hence establishing a connection to the debug metadata does not > seem possible. In the other case, I am noticing some extra fields present in the > `omp_data_s' structure (these fields are not present in the source code) and > hence the `alloca' does not match the metadata definition. > > Here are the details: > http://users.ices.utexas.edu/~ashay/tmp/llvm.html > > Does lldb have similar goals? If yes, which files should I be looking at? > > Any pointers are appreciated! > > Thanks! > Ashay > > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
On Feb 29, 2012, at 2:59 PM, Ashay Rane wrote:> I have been facing a few problems getting names of variables from the bitcode. The bitcode does contain debug metadata. The first problem is regarding `memtmp' variables (apparently, the original variable name is no longer present in the bitcode). The other two problems concern OpenMP. In one case, the instruction is not named and hence establishing a connection to the debug metadata does not seem possible. In the other case, I am noticing some extra fields present in the `omp_data_s' structure (these fields are not present in the source code) and hence the `alloca' does not match the metadata definition.You may try clang. It generates the debugging information you want. - xi
Thanks, I thought about clang but I need to work with Fortran programs too. Hence using dragonegg. Ashay On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Xi Wang <xi.wang at gmail.com> wrote:> On Feb 29, 2012, at 2:59 PM, Ashay Rane wrote: > > I have been facing a few problems getting names of variables from the > bitcode. The bitcode does contain debug metadata. The first problem is > regarding `memtmp' variables (apparently, the original variable name is no > longer present in the bitcode). The other two problems concern OpenMP. In > one case, the instruction is not named and hence establishing a connection > to the debug metadata does not seem possible. In the other case, I am > noticing some extra fields present in the `omp_data_s' structure (these > fields are not present in the source code) and hence the `alloca' does not > match the metadata definition. > > You may try clang. It generates the debugging information you want. > > - xi > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120229/440f2c5d/attachment.html>