llvm dev - Jun 2013 - [LLVMdev] Proposal: type uniquing of debug info for LTO

On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> Hi Manman,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com>
wrote:
>> 
>> The intent of this proposal is to speedup compilation of "-flto
-g" for c++ programs.
>> This is based on discussions with Adrian, David and Eric.
>> 
> 
> Thanks for bringing this back to the list. The original thread was
> getting quite long.
> 
>> ---------------------------
>> Problem:
>> A single class can be used in multiple source files and the DI (Debug
Info) class is included in multiple bc files. The duplication of
>> class definitions causes blow-up in # of MDNodes, # of DIEs, leading to
large memory requirement.
>> 
>> As an example, SPEC xalancbmk requires 7GB of memory when compiled with
-flto -g.
>> With a preliminary implementation of type uniquing, the memory usage
will be down to 2GB.
>> 
>> In order to unique types, we have to break cycles in the MDNodes.
>> 
>> A simple struct definition
>> struct Base {
>> int a;
>> };
>> can cause cycles in MDNodes:
>> !12 = metadata !{i32 786451, metadata !13, null, metadata
!"Base", i32 1, i64 32, i64 32, i32 0, i32 0, null, metadata !14, i32
0, null, null} ; [ DW_TAG_structure_type ] [Base] [line 1, size 32, align 32,
offset 0] [from ]
>> !14 = metadata !{metadata !15, metadata !16}
>> !15 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !13, metadata !12, metadata
!"a", i32 2, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !8} ; [
DW_TAG_member ] [a] [line 2, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from int]
>> !16 = metadata !{i32 786478, metadata !13, metadata !12, metadata
!"Base", metadata !"Base", metadata !"", i32 1,
metadata !17, i1 false, i1 false, i32 0, i32 0, null, i32 320, i1 false, null,
null, i32 0, metadata !20, i32 1} ; [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [Base]
>> 
>> Cycles: !12 -- !14 -- !15 -- !12
>>            !12 -- !14 -- !16 -- !12
>> 
>> These cycles make it hard to unique the same struct used in two bc
files.
>> 
>> ---------------------------
>> How to fix:
>> 
>> We attach a hash value to types to help type uniquing and we also
replace references to types with their hash values.
>> For the above struct "Base", we now have the following
MDNodes:
>> !4 = metadata !{i32 786451, metadata !5, null, metadata
!"Base", i32 1, i64 32, i64 32, i32 0, i32 0, null, metadata !6, i32
0, i32 0, null, i32 915398439} ; [ DW_TAG_structure_type ] [Base] [line 1, size
32, align 32, offset 0] [from ]
>> !6 = metadata !{metadata !7, metadata !9}
>> !7 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !5, i32 915398439, metadata
!"a", i32 2, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !8} ; [
DW_TAG_member ] [a] [line 2, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from int]
>> !9 = metadata !{i32 786478, metadata !5, i32 915398439, metadata
!"Base", metadata !"Base", metadata !"", i32 1,
metadata !10, i1 false, i1 false, i32 0, i32 0, null, i32 320, i1 false, null,
null, i32 0, metadata !13, i32 1} ; [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [Base]
>> 
>> Note that the cycles are gone and !4 has a hash value of 915398439, and
the references to !4 are replaced with 915398439.
>> Thanks Eric for suggesting replacing MD reference with a hash value.
> 
> In particular I recommended this:
> 
> a) For C++ odr replace it with the "hash" that's just a
string
> representing the type name.
> b) For Internal C++ types and all C types replace it with a string
> that's a concatenation of the type name and the name of the compile
> unit.
Yes, that is what we agreed on over email.
> 
>> 
>> There are a few issues:
>> 1> How to generate the hash for a given type?
>> With C++'s ODR, it should be enough by using the context and the
name for non-internal c++ types.
>> For internal c++ types and types of other languages, hash will not be
used.
> 
> Explain this?
For a while, I am going to support both hash and MD reference, once everything
is working with hash,
I will update all debug info testing cases, turn -gtype-uniquing on, and remove
the other path.

For internal c++ types, initially they will follow the path of using MD
references without a hash.
> 
>> My current implementation is to add a few static member functions in
MDNode to profile DI nodes differently.
>> + /// If the array of Vals is for debug info, profile it specially and
return true.
>> + /// If the DI node has a hash value, generate the profile using only
the hash value and the declaration flag.
>> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(ArrayRef<Value*> Vals,
FoldingSetNodeID &ID);
>> 
>> + /// If the MDNode is for debug info, profile it specially and return
true.
>> + /// If the DI node has a hash value, generate the profile using only
the hash value and the declaration flag.
>> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(const MDNode *M, FoldingSetNodeID
&ID);
>> 
>> + /// Given a hash value and a flag, generate the profile for later
lookup.
>> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(unsigned Hash, bool Declaration,
FoldingSetNodeID &ID);
>> 
>> These static functions are called in Metadata.cpp:
>> void MDNode::Profile(FoldingSetNodeID &ID) const {
>> +  if (profileDebugInfoNode(this, ID))
>> +    return;
>> +
>> 
>> There are other examples of these in MDNode for handling of specific
metadata.
>> /// Methods for metadata merging.
>> static MDNode *getMostGenericTBAA(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>> static MDNode *getMostGenericFPMath(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>> static MDNode *getMostGenericRange(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>> 
>> Comments are welcome on whether this violates any layering rule.
>> 
> 
> As I've said many times in email, I don't think this is a good idea
> and would prefer either a or b below. a) is a much simpler solution.
Any reason that why it is not a good idea? 
> 
>> Other choices are:
>> a> Keep a map in DwarfDebug
>>    Keep in mind that the map is used at many stages, and it has to be
in sync with MDNodeSet.
>> b> Generalize MDNode to be aware of hash (David can provide more
details)
>> c> Extend MDNode to DINode and modify streamers (bitcode
reader|writer, ll reader|writer) to be aware of DINode
>>    We can provide DINode::get(…) to create a DINode. DINode can have
its own Profile function.
>> Other suggestions are welcome.
>> 
> 
> a or b please.
Option a> will require a DwarfDebug pointer in every stage of the compiler,
and passing the map to the DI classes.
A rough estimation is around 100 places.
Is it reasonable to pass a DwarfDebug pointer to DIBuilder and llvm linker?
Also the map needs to be in sync with MDNodeSet, maybe using ValueHandle can
solve the problem.

More details for option b from David

< The alternative I have in mind is a more complete version of what
< you're proposing - a full MD feature, not an MD feature that's just
< barely enough to support the needs of debug info. What we could do is
< allow the insertion of these MDHash things you spoke about but take it
< a step further and have MDNode::getOperand walk through the hash &
< give the value (in this way, DebugInfo wouldn't have to change at all
< to handle hashes - if the Metadata APIs are going to be aware of the
< hashes anyway, they might as well provide this convenience
< functionality) the metadata feature would also have to have some
< blessed top-level named metadata that would have a list of hash+MDNode
< to keep those MDNodes alive (so you wouldn't have to stuff all the
< types in the retained types list - metadata would provide the full
< support, not just half of it).

> 
>> Transition from current DI Metadata:
>> To have a smooth transition, I will add a flag
"-gtype-hashing" for the type uniquing work and turn it on by default
when we are ready.
>> 
> 
> I'd prefer just make the change to have the front end emit the
"hash"
> (it's not really a hash, it's just a string).
Are you saying no transition period? A single patch to have correct handling of
"hash" and to update all existing testing cases?
> 
>> -----------------------------
>> Patches:
>> Expect the following patches:
>> 1> add flag -gtype-hashing
>> 2> add hash field to DI types
>> 3> modify DIBuilder to use hash instead of MD reference
>> 4> related to issue 3
> 
> These can all be a single patch since it shouldn't be very large if we
> go with a) above. If we go with b) then the MDNode work should be done
> in isolation first and then the debug info on top of it.
What is wrong with smaller patches?
My estimation for all the above with a) is about 30K + testing cases.
> 
>> 5> backend change (in DwarfDebug|CompileUnit) to support types
shared among compile units
>>    requires gdwarf-2 gdwarf-3 gdwarf-4 support for issues related to
ref_addr
> 
> #5 can and should be done before the rest of them.
I prefer to submit patches according to the flow of the compiler, starting from
the frontend, then IR, then backend.
The testing cases will be added for front end, llvm-link and backend.
Any reason why #5 should be done first?
> 
>> All changes should be local to debug info classes except patch #4.
> 
> What's patch #4?
Patch #4 above: related to issue 3 (changes corresponding to how to solve issue
#3)

-Manman
> 
> -eric

On Jun 20, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote:
> 
> On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> 
>> Hi Manman,
>> 
>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com>
wrote:
>>> 
>>> The intent of this proposal is to speedup compilation of
"-flto -g" for c++ programs.
>>> This is based on discussions with Adrian, David and Eric.
>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks for bringing this back to the list. The original thread was
>> getting quite long.
>> 
>>> ---------------------------
>>> Problem:
>>> A single class can be used in multiple source files and the DI
(Debug Info) class is included in multiple bc files. The duplication of
>>> class definitions causes blow-up in # of MDNodes, # of DIEs,
leading to large memory requirement.
>>> 
>>> As an example, SPEC xalancbmk requires 7GB of memory when compiled
with -flto -g.
>>> With a preliminary implementation of type uniquing, the memory
usage will be down to 2GB.
>>> 
>>> In order to unique types, we have to break cycles in the MDNodes.
>>> 
>>> A simple struct definition
>>> struct Base {
>>> int a;
>>> };
>>> can cause cycles in MDNodes:
>>> !12 = metadata !{i32 786451, metadata !13, null, metadata
!"Base", i32 1, i64 32, i64 32, i32 0, i32 0, null, metadata !14, i32
0, null, null} ; [ DW_TAG_structure_type ] [Base] [line 1, size 32, align 32,
offset 0] [from ]
>>> !14 = metadata !{metadata !15, metadata !16}
>>> !15 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !13, metadata !12, metadata
!"a", i32 2, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !8} ; [
DW_TAG_member ] [a] [line 2, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from int]
>>> !16 = metadata !{i32 786478, metadata !13, metadata !12, metadata
!"Base", metadata !"Base", metadata !"", i32 1,
metadata !17, i1 false, i1 false, i32 0, i32 0, null, i32 320, i1 false, null,
null, i32 0, metadata !20, i32 1} ; [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [Base]
>>> 
>>> Cycles: !12 -- !14 -- !15 -- !12
>>>           !12 -- !14 -- !16 -- !12
>>> 
>>> These cycles make it hard to unique the same struct used in two bc
files.
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------
>>> How to fix:
>>> 
>>> We attach a hash value to types to help type uniquing and we also
replace references to types with their hash values.
>>> For the above struct "Base", we now have the following
MDNodes:
>>> !4 = metadata !{i32 786451, metadata !5, null, metadata
!"Base", i32 1, i64 32, i64 32, i32 0, i32 0, null, metadata !6, i32
0, i32 0, null, i32 915398439} ; [ DW_TAG_structure_type ] [Base] [line 1, size
32, align 32, offset 0] [from ]
>>> !6 = metadata !{metadata !7, metadata !9}
>>> !7 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !5, i32 915398439, metadata
!"a", i32 2, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !8} ; [
DW_TAG_member ] [a] [line 2, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from int]
>>> !9 = metadata !{i32 786478, metadata !5, i32 915398439, metadata
!"Base", metadata !"Base", metadata !"", i32 1,
metadata !10, i1 false, i1 false, i32 0, i32 0, null, i32 320, i1 false, null,
null, i32 0, metadata !13, i32 1} ; [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [Base]
>>> 
>>> Note that the cycles are gone and !4 has a hash value of 915398439,
and the references to !4 are replaced with 915398439.
>>> Thanks Eric for suggesting replacing MD reference with a hash
value.
>> 
>> In particular I recommended this:
>> 
>> a) For C++ odr replace it with the "hash" that's just a
string
>> representing the type name.
>> b) For Internal C++ types and all C types replace it with a string
>> that's a concatenation of the type name and the name of the compile
>> unit.
> Yes, that is what we agreed on over email.
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> There are a few issues:
>>> 1> How to generate the hash for a given type?
>>> With C++'s ODR, it should be enough by using the context and
the name for non-internal c++ types.
>>> For internal c++ types and types of other languages, hash will not
be used.
>> 
>> Explain this?
> 
> For a while, I am going to support both hash and MD reference, once
everything is working with hash,
> I will update all debug info testing cases, turn -gtype-uniquing on, and
remove the other path.
> 
> For internal c++ types, initially they will follow the path of using MD
references without a hash.
> 
>> 
>>> My current implementation is to add a few static member functions
in MDNode to profile DI nodes differently.
>>> + /// If the array of Vals is for debug info, profile it specially
and return true.
>>> + /// If the DI node has a hash value, generate the profile using
only the hash value and the declaration flag.
>>> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(ArrayRef<Value*> Vals,
FoldingSetNodeID &ID);
>>> 
>>> + /// If the MDNode is for debug info, profile it specially and
return true.
>>> + /// If the DI node has a hash value, generate the profile using
only the hash value and the declaration flag.
>>> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(const MDNode *M,
FoldingSetNodeID &ID);
>>> 
>>> + /// Given a hash value and a flag, generate the profile for later
lookup.
>>> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(unsigned Hash, bool
Declaration, FoldingSetNodeID &ID);
>>> 
>>> These static functions are called in Metadata.cpp:
>>> void MDNode::Profile(FoldingSetNodeID &ID) const {
>>> +  if (profileDebugInfoNode(this, ID))
>>> +    return;
>>> +
>>> 
>>> There are other examples of these in MDNode for handling of
specific metadata.
>>> /// Methods for metadata merging.
>>> static MDNode *getMostGenericTBAA(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>>> static MDNode *getMostGenericFPMath(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>>> static MDNode *getMostGenericRange(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>>> 
>>> Comments are welcome on whether this violates any layering rule.
>>> 
>> 
>> As I've said many times in email, I don't think this is a good
idea
>> and would prefer either a or b below. a) is a much simpler solution.
> Any reason that why it is not a good idea? 
> 
>> 
>>> Other choices are:
>>> a> Keep a map in DwarfDebug
>>>   Keep in mind that the map is used at many stages, and it has to
be in sync with MDNodeSet.
>>> b> Generalize MDNode to be aware of hash (David can provide more
details)
>>> c> Extend MDNode to DINode and modify streamers (bitcode
reader|writer, ll reader|writer) to be aware of DINode
>>>   We can provide DINode::get(…) to create a DINode. DINode can have
its own Profile function.
>>> Other suggestions are welcome.
>>> 
>> 
>> a or b please.
> Option a> will require a DwarfDebug pointer in every stage of the
compiler, and passing the map to the DI classes.
> A rough estimation is around 100 places.
> Is it reasonable to pass a DwarfDebug pointer to DIBuilder and llvm linker?
> Also the map needs to be in sync with MDNodeSet, maybe using ValueHandle
can solve the problem.
What about putting the map in LLVMContextImpl?
It already has a few things specifically for debug info:
std::vector<DebugRecVH> ScopeRecords;
DenseMap<std::pair<MDNode*, MDNode*>, int> ScopeInlinedAt;
…

I remember David mentioned it once and I forgot about the conclusion.

Thanks,
Manman
> 
> More details for option b from David
> 
> < The alternative I have in mind is a more complete version of what
> < you're proposing - a full MD feature, not an MD feature that's
just
> < barely enough to support the needs of debug info. What we could do is
> < allow the insertion of these MDHash things you spoke about but take it
> < a step further and have MDNode::getOperand walk through the hash &
> < give the value (in this way, DebugInfo wouldn't have to change at
all
> < to handle hashes - if the Metadata APIs are going to be aware of the
> < hashes anyway, they might as well provide this convenience
> < functionality) the metadata feature would also have to have some
> < blessed top-level named metadata that would have a list of hash+MDNode
> < to keep those MDNodes alive (so you wouldn't have to stuff all the
> < types in the retained types list - metadata would provide the full
> < support, not just half of it).
> 
> 
>> 
>>> Transition from current DI Metadata:
>>> To have a smooth transition, I will add a flag
"-gtype-hashing" for the type uniquing work and turn it on by default
when we are ready.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'd prefer just make the change to have the front end emit the
"hash"
>> (it's not really a hash, it's just a string).
> Are you saying no transition period? A single patch to have correct
handling of "hash" and to update all existing testing cases?
> 
>> 
>>> -----------------------------
>>> Patches:
>>> Expect the following patches:
>>> 1> add flag -gtype-hashing
>>> 2> add hash field to DI types
>>> 3> modify DIBuilder to use hash instead of MD reference
>>> 4> related to issue 3
>> 
>> These can all be a single patch since it shouldn't be very large if
we
>> go with a) above. If we go with b) then the MDNode work should be done
>> in isolation first and then the debug info on top of it.
> What is wrong with smaller patches?
> My estimation for all the above with a) is about 30K + testing cases.
> 
>> 
>>> 5> backend change (in DwarfDebug|CompileUnit) to support types
shared among compile units
>>>   requires gdwarf-2 gdwarf-3 gdwarf-4 support for issues related to
ref_addr
>> 
>> #5 can and should be done before the rest of them.
> I prefer to submit patches according to the flow of the compiler, starting
from the frontend, then IR, then backend.
> The testing cases will be added for front end, llvm-link and backend.
> Any reason why #5 should be done first?
> 
>> 
>>> All changes should be local to debug info classes except patch #4.
>> 
>> What's patch #4?
> Patch #4 above: related to issue 3 (changes corresponding to how to solve
issue #3)
> 
> -Manman
>> 
>> -eric
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130620/e79a1ae0/attachment.html>

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com>
wrote:
>
> On Jun 20, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
> Hi Manman,
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com>
wrote:
>
>
> The intent of this proposal is to speedup compilation of "-flto
-g" for c++
> programs.
> This is based on discussions with Adrian, David and Eric.
>
>
> Thanks for bringing this back to the list. The original thread was
> getting quite long.
>
> ---------------------------
> Problem:
> A single class can be used in multiple source files and the DI (Debug Info)
> class is included in multiple bc files. The duplication of
> class definitions causes blow-up in # of MDNodes, # of DIEs, leading to
> large memory requirement.
>
> As an example, SPEC xalancbmk requires 7GB of memory when compiled with
> -flto -g.
> With a preliminary implementation of type uniquing, the memory usage will
be
> down to 2GB.
>
> In order to unique types, we have to break cycles in the MDNodes.
>
> A simple struct definition
> struct Base {
> int a;
> };
> can cause cycles in MDNodes:
> !12 = metadata !{i32 786451, metadata !13, null, metadata
!"Base", i32 1,
> i64 32, i64 32, i32 0, i32 0, null, metadata !14, i32 0, null, null} ; [
> DW_TAG_structure_type ] [Base] [line 1, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from
]
> !14 = metadata !{metadata !15, metadata !16}
> !15 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !13, metadata !12, metadata
!"a", i32
> 2, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !8} ; [ DW_TAG_member ] [a] [line
> 2, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from int]
> !16 = metadata !{i32 786478, metadata !13, metadata !12, metadata
!"Base",
> metadata !"Base", metadata !"", i32 1, metadata !17, i1
false, i1 false, i32
> 0, i32 0, null, i32 320, i1 false, null, null, i32 0, metadata !20, i32 1}
;
> [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [Base]
>
> Cycles: !12 -- !14 -- !15 -- !12
>           !12 -- !14 -- !16 -- !12
>
> These cycles make it hard to unique the same struct used in two bc files.
>
> ---------------------------
> How to fix:
>
> We attach a hash value to types to help type uniquing and we also replace
> references to types with their hash values.
> For the above struct "Base", we now have the following MDNodes:
> !4 = metadata !{i32 786451, metadata !5, null, metadata !"Base",
i32 1, i64
> 32, i64 32, i32 0, i32 0, null, metadata !6, i32 0, i32 0, null, i32
> 915398439} ; [ DW_TAG_structure_type ] [Base] [line 1, size 32, align 32,
> offset 0] [from ]
> !6 = metadata !{metadata !7, metadata !9}
> !7 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !5, i32 915398439, metadata
!"a", i32
> 2, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !8} ; [ DW_TAG_member ] [a] [line
> 2, size 32, align 32, offset 0] [from int]
> !9 = metadata !{i32 786478, metadata !5, i32 915398439, metadata
!"Base",
> metadata !"Base", metadata !"", i32 1, metadata !10, i1
false, i1 false, i32
> 0, i32 0, null, i32 320, i1 false, null, null, i32 0, metadata !13, i32 1}
;
> [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [Base]
>
> Note that the cycles are gone and !4 has a hash value of 915398439, and the
> references to !4 are replaced with 915398439.
> Thanks Eric for suggesting replacing MD reference with a hash value.
>
>
> In particular I recommended this:
>
> a) For C++ odr replace it with the "hash" that's just a
string
> representing the type name.
> b) For Internal C++ types and all C types replace it with a string
> that's a concatenation of the type name and the name of the compile
> unit.
>
> Yes, that is what we agreed on over email.
>
>
>
> There are a few issues:
> 1> How to generate the hash for a given type?
> With C++'s ODR, it should be enough by using the context and the name
for
> non-internal c++ types.
> For internal c++ types and types of other languages, hash will not be used.
>
>
> Explain this?
>
>
> For a while, I am going to support both hash and MD reference, once
> everything is working with hash,
> I will update all debug info testing cases, turn -gtype-uniquing on, and
> remove the other path.
>
> For internal c++ types, initially they will follow the path of using MD
> references without a hash.
>
>
> My current implementation is to add a few static member functions in MDNode
> to profile DI nodes differently.
> + /// If the array of Vals is for debug info, profile it specially and
> return true.
> + /// If the DI node has a hash value, generate the profile using only the
> hash value and the declaration flag.
> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(ArrayRef<Value*> Vals,
FoldingSetNodeID
> &ID);
>
> + /// If the MDNode is for debug info, profile it specially and return
true.
> + /// If the DI node has a hash value, generate the profile using only the
> hash value and the declaration flag.
> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(const MDNode *M, FoldingSetNodeID
&ID);
>
> + /// Given a hash value and a flag, generate the profile for later lookup.
> +  static bool profileDebugInfoNode(unsigned Hash, bool Declaration,
> FoldingSetNodeID &ID);
>
> These static functions are called in Metadata.cpp:
> void MDNode::Profile(FoldingSetNodeID &ID) const {
> +  if (profileDebugInfoNode(this, ID))
> +    return;
> +
>
> There are other examples of these in MDNode for handling of specific
> metadata.
> /// Methods for metadata merging.
> static MDNode *getMostGenericTBAA(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
> static MDNode *getMostGenericFPMath(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
> static MDNode *getMostGenericRange(MDNode *A, MDNode *B);
>
> Comments are welcome on whether this violates any layering rule.
>
>
> As I've said many times in email, I don't think this is a good idea
> and would prefer either a or b below. a) is a much simpler solution.
>
> Any reason that why it is not a good idea?
>
>
> Other choices are:
> a> Keep a map in DwarfDebug
>   Keep in mind that the map is used at many stages, and it has to be in
sync
> with MDNodeSet.
> b> Generalize MDNode to be aware of hash (David can provide more
details)
> c> Extend MDNode to DINode and modify streamers (bitcode reader|writer,
ll
> reader|writer) to be aware of DINode
>   We can provide DINode::get(…) to create a DINode. DINode can have its own
> Profile function.
> Other suggestions are welcome.
>
>
> a or b please.
>
> Option a> will require a DwarfDebug pointer in every stage of the
compiler,
> and passing the map to the DI classes.
> A rough estimation is around 100 places.
> Is it reasonable to pass a DwarfDebug pointer to DIBuilder and llvm linker?
> Also the map needs to be in sync with MDNodeSet, maybe using ValueHandle
can
> solve the problem.
>
>
> What about putting the map in LLVMContextImpl?
> It already has a few things specifically for debug info:
> std::vector<DebugRecVH> ScopeRecords;
> DenseMap<std::pair<MDNode*, MDNode*>, int> ScopeInlinedAt;
> …
>
> I remember David mentioned it once and I forgot about the conclusion.
I mentioned it only as speculation as to how you were implementing it
already (but you were doing the profile-changing stuff).

I don't think it should be necessary to have the map (in option (a))
in such a central location as LLVMContext. It should be usable just
from DwarfDebug for generation, and DIBuilder can have its own,
separate map to do similar things during DI building.
>
> Thanks,
> Manman
>
>
> More details for option b from David
>
> < The alternative I have in mind is a more complete version of what
> < you're proposing - a full MD feature, not an MD feature that's
just
> < barely enough to support the needs of debug info. What we could do is
> < allow the insertion of these MDHash things you spoke about but take it
> < a step further and have MDNode::getOperand walk through the hash &
> < give the value (in this way, DebugInfo wouldn't have to change at
all
> < to handle hashes - if the Metadata APIs are going to be aware of the
> < hashes anyway, they might as well provide this convenience
> < functionality) the metadata feature would also have to have some
> < blessed top-level named metadata that would have a list of hash+MDNode
> < to keep those MDNodes alive (so you wouldn't have to stuff all the
> < types in the retained types list - metadata would provide the full
> < support, not just half of it).
>
>
>
> Transition from current DI Metadata:
> To have a smooth transition, I will add a flag "-gtype-hashing"
for the type
> uniquing work and turn it on by default when we are ready.
>
>
> I'd prefer just make the change to have the front end emit the
"hash"
> (it's not really a hash, it's just a string).
>
> Are you saying no transition period? A single patch to have correct
handling
> of "hash" and to update all existing testing cases?
>
>
> -----------------------------
> Patches:
> Expect the following patches:
> 1> add flag -gtype-hashing
> 2> add hash field to DI types
> 3> modify DIBuilder to use hash instead of MD reference
> 4> related to issue 3
>
>
> These can all be a single patch since it shouldn't be very large if we
> go with a) above. If we go with b) then the MDNode work should be done
> in isolation first and then the debug info on top of it.
>
> What is wrong with smaller patches?
> My estimation for all the above with a) is about 30K + testing cases.
>
>
> 5> backend change (in DwarfDebug|CompileUnit) to support types shared
among
> compile units
>   requires gdwarf-2 gdwarf-3 gdwarf-4 support for issues related to
ref_addr
>
>
> #5 can and should be done before the rest of them.
>
> I prefer to submit patches according to the flow of the compiler, starting
> from the frontend, then IR, then backend.
> The testing cases will be added for front end, llvm-link and backend.
> Any reason why #5 should be done first?
>
>
> All changes should be local to debug info classes except patch #4.
>
>
> What's patch #4?
>
> Patch #4 above: related to issue 3 (changes corresponding to how to solve
> issue #3)
>
> -Manman
>
>
> -eric
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>