search for: debug_string

Currently llvm-dwarfdump isn't very useful on ELF .o files because it doesn't apply relocations. nlewycky at ducttape:~$ llvm-dwarfdump helloworld.o | grep debug_str\\[ 0x0000000c: DW_AT_producer [DW_FORM_strp] ( .debug_str[0x00000000] = "clang version 3.2 (trunk 163034)") 0x00000012: DW_AT_name [DW_FORM_strp] ( .debug_str[0x00000000] = "clang version 3.2 (trunk

On 2020-11-14, Alexander Yermolovich wrote: >Thanks for doing a diff and asking in other groups. > >So if I understand your concern with using first reloc as it relates to .debug_str. > >In DWARF4 for .debug_str is referenced from .debug_info, .debug_type using DW_FORM_strp. For DWARF32 it's 32bit unsigned, for DWARF64 it's 64bit unsigned. So in relocation section for some

> -----Original Message----- > From: Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:51 AM > To: Alexander Yermolovich <ayermolo at fb.com> > Cc: David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>; Wenlei He <wenlei at fb.com>; llvm- > dev at lists.llvm.org; Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com>; James > Henderson

> On Jan 19, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 19, 2015, at 10:08 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Hey guys, >> >> Frederic is introducing the expression dumping support and in the interests of tersity is skipping the "DW_" in every

On 18.11.2020 0:20, Robinson, Paul wrote: > This is a problem only if the .debug_str section *by itself* exceeds 4GB; > are we anticipating that will happen IRL? The section is just a string > section, by itself it has no 32/64 format. > > If the .debug_str section *by itself* exceeds 4GB, then yes any string > with a 32-bit reference to it must be in the first 4GB. Strings

Hey guys, Frederic is introducing the expression dumping support and in the interests of tersity is skipping the "DW_" in every "DW_OP" (heck, we could even skip the "OP" given the context - nothing else textual can appear there, right?) Any thoughts on skipping the "DW_" (maybe even the AT/TAG/FORM too) in the rest of dwarfdump? (skipping the AT/TAG (FORM

On 19.11.2020 03:21, Cary Coutant wrote: >>> If the .debug_str section *by itself* exceeds 4GB, then yes any string >>> with a 32-bit reference to it must be in the first 4GB. Strings that >>> have only 64-bit references to them can be sorted to the end of the >>> section, if necessary. I wouldn't think anyone guarantees or cares >>> about the

> On Jan 19, 2015, at 10:34 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com <mailto:aprantl at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Jan 19, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com <mailto:aprantl at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> >>> On Jan

Hi all, Need your help. I added some debug information to my code according to Kaleidoscope-9 sample and got stuck with a GDB error: (gdb) info functions > invalid dwarf2 offset 1849950870 > My module is a DLL built with llc+ld toolchain. Target triple: 'i686-w64-mingw32'. Looking this offset (1849950870 == 0x6e440296) in dwarfdump output of the dll gave the following:

Sorry, this is the attachment. 2014-02-19 15:08 GMT+08:00 杨勇勇 <triple.yang at gmail.com>: > Thank you. > > Here is an example and the attchment contains extra files including object > file and executable file. > I want to print for example the value of "a", but lldb command "frame > variable a" displays "0" and so does "b", and

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:34 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:28 AM Nagaraju Mekala via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 6:16 PM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > -----Original Message-----

Hear hear. DW_ adds no readability but AT_/TAG_/OP_/etc do. Dropping the FORM entirely is fine; I view that as a mechanical encoding thing, not relevant to the informational content. If you're debugging the encoding then it would matter, but for a random string-value attribute it really doesn't matter which of the 3 (4?) different forms was used as long as the actual string shows up

Since updating today I get: section name .debug_str is longer than 8 characters and will use a non-standard string table This is LLD + Coff/DWARF; Is this now unsupported, am I doing something wrong or something else?Alternatively, what can I do to hide it?

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:29 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:24 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:17 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:05 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: >

...36084> (sandybridge): > llvm-exegesis -opcode-name IMUL16rri8 -benchmark-mode latency --- asm_template: name: latency IMUL16rri8 cpu_name: sandybridge llvm_triple: x86_64-grtev4-linux-gnu num_repetitions: 10000 measurements: - { key: latency, value: 4.0115, debug_string: '' } error: '' ... > llvm-exegesis -opcode-name IMUL16rri8 -benchmark-mode uops --- asm_template: name: uops IMUL16rri8 cpu_name: sandybridge llvm_triple: x86_64-grtev4-linux-gnu num_repetitions: 10000 measurements: - { key: '2...

All of this information is contained in the DWARF debug info that you must generate. Are you generating DWARF? If not, you will need to. If so, please attach an example program that contains DWARF and specify which function you are having trouble getting variable information for. Greg Clayton On Feb 18, 2014, at 12:44 AM, 杨勇勇 <triple.yang at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, all > > I

?Hi ! I have a question about code used for collecting ranges. I was trying to fix PR35199. Its issue that it calls unreachable when calls DWARFObject::getFileName(). We do not implement this method in LLD and it fails. Issue appears when we start to provide .debug_str section to DWARF parser. And it is relative to following code (lines 335-339):

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:35 AM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 15, 2016, at 10:54 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Branching off from a discussion of improvements to DIGlobalVariable > representations that Adrian's working on - got me thinking about related > changes that have

Great, thanks! Those results are about roughly what I was expecting. I assume "compilation time" is actually just the link time? I find it particularly interesting that the DWARFLinker rewriting solution produces the same size improvement in .debug_line as the fragmented DWARF approach. That suggests that in that case, fragmented DWARF output is probably about as optimal as it can get.

Thanks for doing a diff and asking in other groups. So if I understand your concern with using first reloc as it relates to .debug_str. In DWARF4 for .debug_str is referenced from .debug_info, .debug_type using DW_FORM_strp. For DWARF32 it's 32bit unsigned, for DWARF64 it's 64bit unsigned. So in relocation section for some .debug_info section we will have a relocation entry to patch up