similar to: [LLVMdev] Generating DWARF info

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Generating DWARF info"

2011 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
Seems the last use of DIFactory in LLVM/Clang is in: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp to get the enums llvm::DIFactory::OpDeref and llvm::DIFactory::OpPlus. Shouldn't this be moved to DIBuilder and remove the dependency completely? -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
2009 Oct 07
2
[LLVMdev] DebugFactory
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > Here is a patch that does just that. This does not work. I'm getting llvm/tools/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp: In member function ‘llvm::DIType clang::CodeGen::CGDebugInfo::CreateQualifiedType(clang::QualType, llvm::DICompileUnit)’: /Users/yash/clean/llvm/tools/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp:225: error:
2010 Sep 05
0
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
On 5 September 2010 19:32, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > I've carefully studied the source code of CGDebugInfo in clang as a working > example. One puzzlement is that there's a discrepancy between what the > "source level debugging with LLVM" docs say and what clang does: According > to the docs, DW_TAG_formal_parameter is used to specify a formal
2011 Feb 18
0
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
I didn't know DIFactory existed until you mentioned it just now. And if folks are adding brand new classes to LLVM, can we not follow the naming conventions in the developer guidelines? On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > Seems the last use of DIFactory in LLVM/Clang is in: > > clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp to get the enums
2009 Oct 07
0
[LLVMdev] DebugFactory
OK so the problem is that the compiler sees '0' and can't decide whether its an integer or a null pointer of type Constant *. I guess the new functions will have to have slightly different names. On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > Here is a patch
2010 Sep 06
2
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 5 September 2010 19:32, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > I've carefully studied the source code of CGDebugInfo in clang as a > working > > example. One puzzlement is that there's a discrepancy between what the > > "source level debugging with LLVM" docs
2010 Sep 05
2
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
I hate to be a nag, but after several days of working on this I am still utterly stumped. Let me recap the situation as it currently stands: I'm trying to write code that generates DWARF debugging information for my compiler using DIFactory and friends. Unfortunately the information I am generating appears to be invalid, but I can't figure out the cause. Based on the advice in the
2011 Feb 18
4
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
Sorry, I meant DIBuilder. On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > I didn't know DIFactory existed until you mentioned it just now. > > And if folks are adding brand new classes to LLVM, can we not follow the > naming conventions in the developer guidelines? > > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at
2010 Dec 06
4
[LLVMdev] question on generating dwarf metadata
On 12/06/2010 12:03 PM, Devang Patel wrote: > As I understand, you are not interested in 'how to use DIFactory'. Do you want > to know what are the fields of metadata to encode debug info for a local variable ? > That'd be > > !7 = metadata !{ > i32, ;; Tag (see below) > metadata, ;; Context > metadata, ;; Name > metadata, ;; Reference to
2010 Dec 06
0
[LLVMdev] question on generating dwarf metadata
On Dec 4, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Bagel wrote: > On 12/03/2010 06:28 PM, Devang Patel wrote: >> We are working on a document. Here is current draft: >> http://wiki.llvm.org/Debug_Information >> >> - >> Devang > > While this is great news, it doesn't completely satisfy my needs. Your documentation assumes one is going to use the LLVM provided functions
2010 Dec 09
0
[LLVMdev] question on generating dwarf metadata
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Bagel <bagel99 at gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/06/2010 12:03 PM, Devang Patel wrote: > > As I understand, you are not interested in 'how to use DIFactory'. Do you > want > > to know what are the fields of metadata to encode debug info for a local > variable ? > > That'd be > > > > !7 = metadata !{ > >
2010 Dec 04
4
[LLVMdev] question on generating dwarf metadata
On 12/03/2010 06:28 PM, Devang Patel wrote: > We are working on a document. Here is current draft: > http://wiki.llvm.org/Debug_Information > > - > Devang While this is great news, it doesn't completely satisfy my needs. Your documentation assumes one is going to use the LLVM provided functions (such as DIFactory::). My front-end can't use them because it is not
2008 Jun 21
3
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc -O0 compile times
I've started investigating -O0 -g compile times with llvm-gcc, which are pretty important for people in development mode (e.g. all debug builds of llvm itself!). I've found some interesting things. I'm testing with mainline as of r52596 in a Release build and with checking disabled in the front- end. My testcase is a large C++ source file: my friend
2011 Feb 19
3
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 18 February 2011 21:34, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry, I meant DIBuilder. > > DIBuilder is the new DIFactory. I've been playing with it this week > and it's much easier and straightforward to use. I'm still having > problems to create arrays, though.
2009 Oct 10
1
[LLVMdev] DebugFactory
The old patch works, it's just that when you pass "0, 0, 0" for size, align and offset the compiler can't decide which method to call since "0" can be either a pointer or an integer. I can produce a new patch if you like, but I'm having trouble thinking of good names for the new methods. Alternatively, I suppose we could re-arrange the order of the parameters
2011 Mar 17
2
[LLVMdev] Writing unit tests for DWARF?
On Mar 17, 2011, at 7:29 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 17 March 2011 13:48, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: >> I think you are mistaken here. I maintain and support debug info for two front ends (llvm-gcc and clang). Go ahead and check svn archives for last one year and see how many times I had to update llvm-gcc FE. > > Hi Devang, > > First, I'm not
2014 Jun 02
2
[LLVMdev] [lldb-dev] MCJIT Mach-O JIT debugging
We don't currently apply any relocations (that I know of) for debug info in LLDB. > On Jun 2, 2014, at 12:35 PM, Keno Fischer <kfischer at college.harvard.edu> wrote: > > I think I'm getting closer. The debug_info section is being relocated correctly (I think): > > 0x00000000: Compile Unit: length = 0x00000045 version = 0x0003 abbr_offset = 0x00000000 addr_size =
2008 Jun 26
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc -O0 compile times
On Jun 21, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > $ sdiff -w 120 gcc.size llvm.size > Segment : 1495968 | Segment : 2211617 > Section (__TEXT, __text): 251661 | Section (__TEXT, __text): > 290873 > Section (__DWARF, __debug_frame): 82752 | Section (__DWARF, > __debug_frame): 80240 > Section (__DWARF, __debug_info): 671478 | Section
2009 Sep 23
2
[LLVMdev] DebugFactory
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> wrote: >> >> 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 =
2009 Oct 02
0
[LLVMdev] DebugFactory
Here is a patch that does just that. On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Sep 22, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Talin wrote: > >>> > >>>