llvm dev - Jan 2013 - [LLVMdev] RFC: Improving our DWARF (and ELF) emission testing capabilities

>> > I'm fine with this as long as llvm-dwarfdump gets maintained.
>> >
>>
>> I agree, and as I said in the original email, in the long term I
>> believe llvm-dwarfdump is the correct solution.
>>
>
> The problem is that if no one is working on testing these sorts of things
> with llvm-dwarfdump then it won't be maintained for this purpose.
> See
> elf-dump and people not expanding/fixing bugs in llvm-objdump and using
that
> for tests.
>
Can you clarify/elaborate on this last sentence?

Eli

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com>
wrote:
> >> > I'm fine with this as long as llvm-dwarfdump gets
maintained.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I agree, and as I said in the original email, in the long term I
> >> believe llvm-dwarfdump is the correct solution.
> >>
> >
> > The problem is that if no one is working on testing these sorts of
things
> > with llvm-dwarfdump then it won't be maintained for this purpose.
>
> > See
> > elf-dump and people not expanding/fixing bugs in llvm-objdump and
using
> that
> > for tests.
> >
>
> Can you clarify/elaborate on this last sentence?
>
Sure. People are updating, modifying and adding new tests that use elf-dump
and not updating, modifying or fixing llvm-objdump to test the same thing.

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130118/a9522c3f/attachment.html>

So, using llvm-dwarfdump (and, therefore, lib/DebugInfo) for testing leads
to the following:
if you extend debug info emitted by Clang/LLVM, you also have to fix
lib/DebugInfo to support
these extensions (looks like Eric was doing this in his DWARF5-related
changes). While this is
tiring and certainly slows down the development, this also helps to keep
the tools "in sync" in some sense.

As a "user" of lib/DebugInfo I find it pretty useful and it would be a
pity
if it wouldn't be able to parse or
would lack important features of the code produced by LLVM itself.


On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:15 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at
gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com>
wrote:
>
>> >> > I'm fine with this as long as llvm-dwarfdump gets
maintained.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I agree, and as I said in the original email, in the long term
I
>> >> believe llvm-dwarfdump is the correct solution.
>> >>
>> >
>> > The problem is that if no one is working on testing these sorts of
>> things
>> > with llvm-dwarfdump then it won't be maintained for this
purpose.
>>
>> > See
>> > elf-dump and people not expanding/fixing bugs in llvm-objdump and
using
>> that
>> > for tests.
>> >
>>
>> Can you clarify/elaborate on this last sentence?
>>
>
> Sure. People are updating, modifying and adding new tests that use
> elf-dump and not updating, modifying or fixing llvm-objdump to test the
> same thing.
>
> -eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>

-- 
Alexey Samsonov, MSK
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130121/1963dcf3/attachment.html>

Eric Christopher [echristo at gmail.com] wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com>
wrote:
>
>>>> > I'm fine with this as long as llvm-dwarfdump gets
maintained.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, and as I said in the original email, in the long term
I
>>>> believe llvm-dwarfdump is the correct solution.
>>>
>>> The problem is that if no one is working on testing these sorts of
things
>>> with llvm-dwarfdump then it won't be maintained for this
purpose.
>>>
>>> See
>>> elf-dump and people not expanding/fixing bugs in llvm-objdump and
using that
>>> for tests.
>>>
>> Can you clarify/elaborate on this last sentence?
>>
> Sure. People are updating, modifying and adding new tests that use
> elf-dump and not updating, modifying or fixing llvm-objdump to test the
> same thing.
Speaking as a relative newbie, I don't see any way to know that elf-dump
is deprecated in favor of llvm-objdump; neither of them are mentioned
anywhere on the website.  Nor is llvm-dwarfdump for that matter.
D'you think there could be some mention of these on the Command Guide
or Testing Infrastructure Guide pages?
http://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/index.html
http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html
(Yeah, yeah, I know, "patches welcome.")

--paulr