similar to: Collecting address ranges in DWARFUnit::collectAddressRanges.

David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:44 AM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> > wrote: > >> There's no requirement that DW_AT_ranges (or high/low_pc) appear on the >> skeleton CU rather than the DWO CU. So it's quite possible that to get the >> address ranges covered by the CU one would

There's no requirement that DW_AT_ranges (or high/low_pc) appear on the skeleton CU rather than the DWO CU. So it's quite possible that to get the address ranges covered by the CU one would need to look in the DWO, I think? Is that not correct/have I misunderstood something there? The DWO isn't supposed to contain addresses (because it isn't supposed to contain relocations). In

Totally fair call, sorry it took me a while to come back around to this - added in r324702 On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 3:47 PM Rafael Avila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:44 AM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> > > wrote: > > >

Nah, doesn't look like it. Removed it (& the place I copied it from) in: r324738 Thanks! On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:28 AM George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > >Totally fair call, sorry it took me a while to come back around to this - > added in r324702 > > Thanks ! Have a question: does it need "requres shell" ? > I tried without and it

Ah, sorry, thanks - removed the "./" prefix entirely. Hope that works - if you happen to test it & find it doesn't, please let me know :) On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:38 AM George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > I expect r324738 will break on windows, > > as I mentioned I had to change > > > CHECK: ./test.cpp:2:51 > > to > > CHECK:

I expect r324738 will break on windows, as I mentioned I had to change CHECK: ./test.cpp:2:51 to CHECK: {\\|/}}test.cpp:2:51 ? Best regards, George | Developer | Access Softek, Inc ________________________________ От: David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> Отправлено: 9 февраля 2018 г. 18:35 Кому: George Rimar Копия: Robinson, Paul; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Rafael Avila de Espindola

>Totally fair call, sorry it took me a while to come back around to this - added in r324702 Thanks ! Have a question: does it need "requres shell" ? I tried without and it worked for me under windows (had to change check to CHECK: .{{\\|/}}test.cpp:2:51 though). And I see nothing special probably that might require shell I think. We use cd/rm/cp in LLD testcases without requiring

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 2:09 PM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > > On May 3, 2017, at 2:00 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > So Dehao and I have been dealing with some of the nitty gritty details > of debug info with ThinLTO, specifically with Fission(Split DWARF). > > > > This applies to LTO as well, so I

> On May 3, 2017, at 7:43 PM, Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> On May 3, 2017, at 2:59 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 2:09 PM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com <mailto:aprantl at apple.com>> wrote:

Sorry, trying to catch up a bit late… It sounds like having more than one CU per .dwo is outside of the intention of the DWARF specification (though not explicitly forbidden), since there is an implied 1-1 relationship between skeleton CU and .dwo. There is an explicit 1-1 relationship between skeleton CU and split-full CU (not .dwo). This suggests to me that if you want a .dwo to have multiple

There was some discussion about this in D34765, and I had a follow-up chat with Wolfgang separately, plus spent a fair amount of time in reading and thinking today. I thought I would write my understanding all down here so we can reach a common understanding of how it ought to work, and therefore what our code should do. For any non-DWARF-experts who might be interested, in principle this

So Dehao and I have been dealing with some of the nitty gritty details of debug info with ThinLTO, specifically with Fission(Split DWARF). This applies to LTO as well, so I won't single out ThinLTO here. 1) Multiple CUs in a .dwo file Clang/LLVM produces a CU for each original source file - these CUs are kept through IR linking (thin or full) and produced as distinct CUs in the resulting

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 Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Alexey Samsonov <vonosmas at gmail.com> wrote: > SGTM. This will bring us closer to the point when we can write tests, > where we strip out the .dwo files from executables, package them together > with llvm-dwp, and then verify that we still get all we need from > llvm-symbolizer. > Not quite following here - dwo sections are already stripped

Hi, I am still struggling with my optimized/speedup build of llvm-toolchain v3.8.1. Here: Enable LTO, PGO, optimized-TableGen, split-DWARF and build with GNU/gold and LLVMgold-plugin. The objcopy (binutils v2.22) here on Ubuntu/precise AMD64 does not support '--extract-dwo'. My build fails with... /usr/bin/objcopy: unrecognized option '--extract-dwo'. Now, I did a full build of

Yep, Wolfgang picked up on the one thing I saw too. This is why I like having people review my stuff. I think it's a bit of a pity that str_offsets_base can point into the middle of a str_offsets contribution in some ways Actually I changed my mind after saying that in the review, and in this writeup I concluded that it cannot do that. str_offsets_base points to the element immediately

Hello DWARF fans, I've just posted a set of four refactoring patches for DebugInfo/DWARF, which move in the direction of handling DWARF v4 or v5 type units and compile units more coherently. In DWARF v4, type units and compile units are strictly segregated into the .debug_types and .debug_info sections, respectively. This division was pretty ingrained into how DebugInfo/DWARF handled the

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Pieb, > Wolfgang via llvm-dev > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 6:14 PM > To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [DWARFv5] Reading the .debug_str_offsets section > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at

So, after many shenanigans, we finally have -gmlt-like inline summary debug info in .debug_info when using -gsplit-dwarf (see r221306). Hooray \o/ Testing this with asan, it seems to be working: Given a simple example of inlining failure: $ cat asan.cpp __attribute__((always_inline)) inline void func(int* i) { *i = 3; } int main() { func(nullptr); } The failures before this change: #0

Much like the recent efforts to provide a port of dsymutil in the LLVM project, I'm looking at providing an implementation of the Fission/Split DWARF DWP tool ( https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DebugFissionDWP ) in LLVM. While there's potentially some overlap between the two tools, I'm thinking of keeping them separate at least initially since much of the debug info doesn't need to be