search for: dw_tag_volatile_typ

...ugging information. We are replacing this interface with new simple interface, DIBuilder. Here is one example that demonstrates differences between two interfaces. To create debug information entries to encode volatile type one would use following call in a language front end, CreateDerivedType(DW_TAG_volatile_type, Context, StringRef(), File, 0 /*line no*/, type_size_in_bits, type_align_in_bits, 0 /* offset */, 0 /* flags */, OriginalType); using DIFactory interface. Now, DIBuilder allows you to do the same using following call. createQualifiedType(DW...

...e are replacing this interface with new > simple interface, DIBuilder. > Here is one example that demonstrates differences between two interfaces. To > create debug information entries to encode volatile type one would use > following call in a language front end, > CreateDerivedType(DW_TAG_volatile_type, Context, StringRef(), File, >                           0 /*line no*/, type_size_in_bits, > type_align_in_bits, >                           0 /* offset */, 0 /* flags */, OriginalType); > using DIFactory interface. Now, DIBuilder allows you to do the same using > following call. &g...

...interface with new >> simple interface, DIBuilder. >> Here is one example that demonstrates differences between two interfaces. To >> create debug information entries to encode volatile type one would use >> following call in a language front end, >> CreateDerivedType(DW_TAG_volatile_type, Context, StringRef(), File, >> 0 /*line no*/, type_size_in_bits, >> type_align_in_bits, >> 0 /* offset */, 0 /* flags */, OriginalType); >> using DIFactory interface. Now, DIBuilder allows you to do the same using >&...

...1, i32 0, metadata !0, null} !7 = metadata !{i32 590080, metadata !0, metadata !"memtmp", metadata !1, i32 2, metadata !8, i32 0} ; [ DW_TAG_auto_variable ] !8 = metadata !{i32 589877, metadata !1, metadata !"", metadata !1, i32 0, i64 32, i64 32, i64 0, i32 0, metadata !5} ; [ DW_TAG_volatile_type ] !9 = metadata !{i32 2, i32 0, metadata !0, null} !10 = metadata !{i32 3, i32 0, metadata !0, null} !11 = metadata !{i32 4, i32 0, metadata !0, null} ========

...AG_subprogram DW_AT_name ("f") DW_AT_inline (DW_INL_inlined) 0x00000096: DW_TAG_variable DW_AT_name ("var") DW_AT_type (0x000000a9 "volatile Foo") 0x000000a1: NULL 0x000000a9: DW_TAG_volatile_type DW_AT_type (0x000000ae "Foo") 0x000000ae: DW_TAG_structure_type DW_AT_name ("Foo") DW_AT_declaration (true) 0x000000c1: DW_TAG_compile_unit DW_AT_low_pc (0x0000000000000000) DW_...

...Tag = 46, Count = 1341021, Ops = 12069189, Name = DW_TAG_subprogram Tag = 257, Count = 4373879, Ops = 20785065, Name = DW_TAG_arg_variable Tag = 8, Count = 2246, Ops = 6738, Name = DW_TAG_imported_declaration Tag = 53, Count = 57, Ops = 228, Name = DW_TAG_volatile_type Tag = 15, Count = 55163, Ops = 220652, Name = DW_TAG_pointer_type Tag = 41, Count = 3382, Ops = 6764, Name = DW_TAG_file_type Tag = 22, Count = 158479, Ops = 633916, Name = DW_TAG_typedef Tag = 48, Count = 486, Ops = 2430, Name = DW_TAG_tem...

Folks, we work on optimization of binary size and improvement of debug info quality. To reduce the size of the binary we use -ffunction-sections so that unused code would be garbage collected. When the linker does garbage collection, a lot of abandoned debug info is left behind. Besides inflated debug info size, we ended up with overlapping address ranges and no way to say valid vs garbage

In r219010, I merged integer and string fields into a single header field. By reducing the number of metadata operands used in debug info, this saved 2.2GB on an `llvm-lto` bootstrap. I've done some profiling of DW_TAGs to see what parts of PR17891 and PR17892 to tackle next, and I've concluded that they will be insufficient. Instead, I'd like to implement a more aggressive plan,