search for: mdhash

...DIBuilder, modify access > functions in DI classes to pass in the map. > May need to modify printing functions in AsmWriter. > --------------------- > Option b) I am going to expand David's description with more details, > correct me if I am wrong. > A special Value called MDHash in parallel with MDString, MDHash needs > to specify whether it is a use of the hash value, or a definition of the > hash value > The updated class hierarchy: > Value -- MDNode > -- MDHash > -- MDString > -- User -- Instruction...

...ve more planning >> and code review and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) >> >> >> Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? >> Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to >> support MDHash" or something like that. >> >> >> I'd like to hear a rationale for wanting b first. I don't know (and >> can think of) any other users of this functionality right now. >> >> >> I will try my best :] >> MDNode has a list of operands, o...

...functions in DI classes to pass in the map. > >> May need to modify printing functions in AsmWriter. > >> --------------------- > >> Option b) I am going to expand David's description with more details, correct me if I am wrong. > >> A special Value called MDHash in parallel with MDString, MDHash needs to specify whether it is a use of the hash value, or a definition of the hash value > >> The updated class hierarchy: > >> Value -- MDNode > >> -- MDHash > >> -- MDString > >>...

...lder, modify access functions in DI classes to pass in the map. >> May need to modify printing functions in AsmWriter. >> --------------------- >> Option b) I am going to expand David's description with more details, correct me if I am wrong. >> A special Value called MDHash in parallel with MDString, MDHash needs to specify whether it is a use of the hash value, or a definition of the hash value >> The updated class hierarchy: >> Value -- MDNode >> -- MDHash >> -- MDString >> -- User -- I...

...in DI classes to pass in the map. >>> May need to modify printing functions in AsmWriter. >>> --------------------- >>> Option b) I am going to expand David's description with more details, >>> correct me if I am wrong. >>> A special Value called MDHash in parallel with MDString, MDHash needs >>> to specify whether it is a use of the hash value, or a definition of the >>> hash value >>> The updated class hierarchy: >>> Value -- MDNode >>> -- MDHash >>> -- MDS...

...ass in the map. >>>> May need to modify printing functions in AsmWriter. >>>> --------------------- >>>> Option b) I am going to expand David's description with more details, >>>> correct me if I am wrong. >>>> A special Value called MDHash in parallel with MDString, MDHash needs >>>> to specify whether it is a use of the hash value, or a definition of the >>>> hash value >>>> The updated class hierarchy: >>>> Value -- MDNode >>>> -- MDHash >>>>...

...>>>>> and code review and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) >>>> >>>> Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? >>>> Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to support MDHash" or something like that. >>> >>> I'd like to hear a rationale for wanting b first. I don't know (and >>> can think of) any other users of this functionality right now. >> >> I will try my best :] >> MDNode has a list of operands, one MDNod...

...p in DwarfDebug, AsmWriter and DIBuilder, modify access functions in DI classes to pass in the map. May need to modify printing functions in AsmWriter. --------------------- Option b) I am going to expand David's description with more details, correct me if I am wrong. A special Value called MDHash in parallel with MDString, MDHash needs to specify whether it is a use of the hash value, or a definition of the hash value The updated class hierarchy: Value -- MDNode -- MDHash -- MDString -- User -- Instruction -- BinaryOperator In the follo...

...w and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) >>>> >>>> >>>> Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? >>>> Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to >>>> support MDHash" or something like that. >>>> >>>> >>>> I'd like to hear a rationale for wanting b first. I don't know (and >>>> can think of) any other users of this functionality right now. >>>> >>>> >>>> I will...

...ve more planning >>>> and code review and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) >>> >>> Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? >>> Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to support MDHash" or something like that. >> >> I'd like to hear a rationale for wanting b first. I don't know (and >> can think of) any other users of this functionality right now. > > I will try my best :] > MDNode has a list of operands, one MDNode's full content can b...

...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 any...

...ice, but it's going to involve more planning >> and code review and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) > > Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? > Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to support MDHash" or something like that. I'd like to hear a rationale for wanting b first. I don't know (and can think of) any other users of this functionality right now. > We can add a weight to MDHash (other names are fine with me), to support multiple MDNodes with the same hash, but different...

...going to involve more planning >>> and code review and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) >> >> Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? >> Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to support MDHash" or something like that. > > I'd like to hear a rationale for wanting b first. I don't know (and > can think of) any other users of this functionality right now. I will try my best :] MDNode has a list of operands, one MDNode's full content can be thought of as a graph,...

...ne with b as a choice, but it's going to involve more planning > and code review and involve people outside of you, me and Dave :) Got it. David, are you okay with the details I added about option b? Let's start a new thread with title "Proposal: extend Metadata (MDNode) to support MDHash" or something like that. We can add a weight to MDHash (other names are fine with me), to support multiple MDNodes with the same hash, but different weight. Thanks, Manman > > -eric > > >> Thanks, >> Manman >> >> On Jun 20, 2013, at 5:39 PM, David Blai...

...< 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...

...and other types. > Inside streamers (bc ll reader), we can create the specialized class according to the opcode. > That requires a lot of changes too :( > I'm still not seeing why your option is the only other one. I.e. my first proposal. >> >>> We can add a weight to MDHash (other names are fine with me), to support multiple MDNodes with the same hash, but different weight. >>> >> >> Wait, what? This sounds like a bad idea. > Why? > The weight is needed to differentiate a forward declaration vs. a definition, they both name the same class, b...

...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 w...

...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 any...

...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 any...

...< 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...