Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "llvm_memori".
Did you mean:
llvm_memory
2017 Sep 07
2
RFC: Introduce DW_OP_LLVM_memory to describe variables in memory with dbg.value
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 5:01 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:01 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:01 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I guess you described this already, but talking it through for
>>> myself/maybe others will
2017 Sep 07
2
RFC: Introduce DW_OP_LLVM_memory to describe variables in memory with dbg.value
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:46 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> Feels to me like bugs rather than inconsistencies (I'd think of an
> inconsistency as "we do X over here intentionally and Y over here
> intentionally but they're in contradiction to one another")
>
The DBG_VALUE MachineInstr actually already has a way to indicate that the
computed
2017 Sep 06
4
RFC: Introduce DW_OP_LLVM_memory to describe variables in memory with dbg.value
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:01 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 1:00 PM Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> LLVM SSA values obviously do not have an address that we can take and
>> they don’t live in registers, so neither the default memory location model
>> nor DW_OP_regN make sense