similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM DebugInfoBuilder

Hi list, hi Talin, I'm working on a frontend to generate IR using the IRBuilder from LLVM. Now I want to add source-level-debuginfo and for that I would like to use the DebugInfoBuilder as it is taking some of the burderns. Unfortunately it does not take all of them, yet. As of today, even in SVN, it only can add a part of information needed. Of course I also need stoppoint, declare,

On Jan 7, 2009, at 3:22 AM, Patrick Boettcher wrote: > Hi list, > hi Talin, > > I'm working on a frontend to generate IR using the IRBuilder from > LLVM. > > Now I want to add source-level-debuginfo and for that I would like > to use the > DebugInfoBuilder as it is taking some of the burderns. Unfortunately > it does > not take all of them, yet. Instead

Fine by me :) On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 7, 2009, at 3:22 AM, Patrick Boettcher wrote: > > > Hi list, > > hi Talin, > > > > I'm working on a frontend to generate IR using the IRBuilder from > > LLVM. > > > > Now I want to add source-level-debuginfo and for that I would like

On Jan 7, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Talin wrote: > Fine by me :) Is it ok to remove DebugInfoBuilder now? I don't think that anything in the tree is using it, what do you think Talin? -Chris > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> > wrote: > > On Jan 7, 2009, at 3:22 AM, Patrick Boettcher wrote: > > > Hi list, > >

Looking at DebugInfo.h, there are a couple of minor features that DebugInfoBuilder that I would miss: 1) The ability to pass in an LLVM type and have it figure out the size, alignment, etc. without having to explicitly pass those values in as parameters to the builder call. 2) The ability for the size & alignment to be specified as Constants rather than as int64 so that the "gep

You are completely correct - the DebugInfoBuilder class as it currently stands is only half finished. I've been meaning to work on it further, however before that can happen I need to actually try and use the basic block stuff in a real program so that I can get a feel for how it works and what the API should look like. It may be a while before I get around to doing that, however, so if

DebugInfo.h is very light weight interface that allows one to manipulate llvm values that holds debugging information directly. On Jan 7, 2009, at 3:22 PM, Talin wrote: > Looking at DebugInfo.h, there are a couple of minor features that > DebugInfoBuilder that I would miss: > > 1) The ability to pass in an LLVM type and have it figure out the > size, alignment, etc. without

Hi John, On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, John Regehr wrote: > Below is some C code and its LLVM translation (using a recent rev). The > compiler goes ahead and loads from x in main, but it seems clear that a > constant propagation pass could have inferred that x is 0. In fact that > is what happens if x is static, but in this case I cannot see how > external linkage of x would invalidate

Hi John, On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, John Regehr wrote: > Below is some C code and its LLVM translation (using a recent rev). The > compiler goes ahead and loads from x in main, but it seems clear that a > constant propagation pass could have inferred that x is 0. In fact that > is what happens if x is static, but in this case I cannot see how > external linkage of x would invalidate

Hi John, On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, John Regehr wrote: > Below is some C code and its LLVM translation (using a recent rev). The > compiler goes ahead and loads from x in main, but it seems clear that a > constant propagation pass could have inferred that x is 0. In fact that > is what happens if x is static, but in this case I cannot see how > external linkage of x would invalidate

Evan Cheng wrote: > I don't think so. Contribution welcome! :-) LLVM debugging support > isn't anywhere near where it needs to be. > Well, here's a rough sketch of what I was thinking of: class DebugInfoBuilder { public: /// Constructor DebugInfoBuilder(); /// Return the type defined by llvm.dbg.anchor.type StructType * GetAnchorType() const; ///

Below is some C code and its LLVM translation (using a recent rev). The compiler goes ahead and loads from x in main, but it seems clear that a constant propagation pass could have inferred that x is 0. In fact that is what happens if x is static, but in this case I cannot see how external linkage of x would invalidate that optimization. This is one of those optimizations that would not be

1. Re: LLVM optmization (Bill Wendling) Hi, The IR is not wrong. I said that the assembler generated by MSVC is quicker. We can see that the for loop, in the TESTE function, is done without jump's in the MSVC and with jumps in LLVM. I think thats the point. If we don't use threads, the result is the same. My test were done with one billion interactions in the for loop. The MSVC

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > >> So, one feature of the late, lamented DebugInfoBuilder that I am missing > >> quite badly, and which is not

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: >>

Are there any utility classes, similar to IRBuilder, for creating source level debugging info? -- Talin

I don't think so. Contribution welcome! :-) LLVM debugging support isn't anywhere near where it needs to be. Evan On May 20, 2008, at 9:53 PM, Talin wrote: > Are there any utility classes, similar to IRBuilder, for creating > source > level debugging info? > > -- Talin > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list >

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: >> So, one feature of the late, lamented DebugInfoBuilder that I am missing >> quite badly, and which is not available in the current DIFactory, is the >> ability to specify structure offsets abstractly. The

On Sep 22, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Talin wrote: > > // Calculate the size of the specified LLVM type. > Constant * DebugInfoBuilder::getSize(const Type * type) { > Constant * one = ConstantInt::get(Type::Int32Ty, 1); > return ConstantExpr::getPtrToInt( > ConstantExpr::getGetElementPtr( > ConstantPointerNull::get(PointerType::getUnqual(type)), >

So, one feature of the late, lamented DebugInfoBuilder that I am missing quite badly, and which is not available in the current DIFactory, is the ability to specify structure offsets abstractly. The DebugFactory requires that you pass in structure offset information as ints, whereas DebugInfoBuilder had "offsetOf" and "alignOf" methods, similar to the "sizeOf"