llvm dev - Jan 2013 - [LLVMdev] Restoring "pubnames" section in DWARF

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Robinson, Paul
<Paul.Robinson at am.sony.com>wrote:
> >We have customers that rely on the symbol information from the
> >"pubnames" section in the DWARF data.  Generation of this
information
> >was removed in this commit:
> >
> >commit dfa30e1ab243990eda4732a6dffb91e965e7a755
> >Author: Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com>
> >Date:   Wed Nov 9 05:24:07 2011 +0000
> >
> >     Remove the pubnames section, no one consumes it.
> >
> >     git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk at 144169
> >91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
> >
> >
> >I could submit a patch that brings it back (some tweaks were needed).
> >Is this something you could consider?
> >
> >-Krzysztof
>
> I'd ask that it be made target-dependent, as I don't want it
> (and apparently few do, which is why it was removed).
>
No worries there, it can be put under a flag perhaps.

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130111/1e94dbad/attachment.html>

On 1/11/2013 4:04 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Robinson, Paul
> <Paul.Robinson at am.sony.com <mailto:Paul.Robinson at
am.sony.com>> wrote:
>
>     I'd ask that it be made target-dependent, as I don't want it
>     (and apparently few do, which is why it was removed).
>
>
> No worries there, it can be put under a flag perhaps.
Is there a target hook for generating debug information?  Or should I 
just invent a cl::opt flag and guard the code under that?

-Krzysztof


-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, 
hosted by The Linux Foundation

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <
kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 1/11/2013 4:04 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Robinson, Paul
>> <Paul.Robinson at am.sony.com <mailto:Paul.Robinson at
am.sony.**com<Paul.Robinson at am.sony.com>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     I'd ask that it be made target-dependent, as I don't want
it
>>     (and apparently few do, which is why it was removed).
>>
>>
>> No worries there, it can be put under a flag perhaps.
>>
>
> Is there a target hook for generating debug information?  Or should I just
> invent a cl::opt flag and guard the code under that?
>
>
I'd prefer a flag really (DwarfDebug.cpp) and just pass that down from the
front end if you really need or invent a front end option to control it.
-glegacy-pubtables or something?

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130111/b5e7b11f/attachment.html>