similar to: [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

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

On 6 September 2010 01:05, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn, (...) >         false /* isDefinition */, (...) Hi Talin, The only difference from what I'm doing is that I only export debug symbols in definitions, not declarations. I may be doing wrong, though, for multi-file compilation (haven't tested

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 6 September 2010 01:05, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn, > (...) > > false /* isDefinition */, > (...) > > Hi Talin, > > The only difference from what I'm doing is that I only

On Aug 31, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Talin wrote: > 4) What is the meaning of the "inlinedAt" argument for DebugLoc::get()? Does it mean the location where the inlined code was defined, or the location where it was expanded? the location where it was expanded - Devang

Here are some issues that I am unclear about. What would be great is if the answers could be incorporated into the comments and documentation for DIFactory and DebugInfo.h: 1) What types of DIScope are valid arguments for DebugLoc::get()? The method takes an MDNode* argument, so looking at the function signature is no help. For example, DIFile is a subtype of DIScope, however looking at

If llvm compiler mis compiles a code then it is unlikely to be a bug in IRBuilder. Most likely it could be a bug in FE's use of IRBuilder or codegen/optimization bug. In either case IRBuilder won't save you. Same is true for DIFactory. It is a utility to construct MDNodes. It does not strictly enforce semantic correctness of debug info. (In fact, it is on my list somewhere to absorb

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

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

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

Hi All, Is there any documentation on how to use DIFactory to generate basic debug info? It seems similar enough to IRBuilder but working with objects (rather than pointers) and that's raising some issues. Also, am I supposed to run the ModuleDebugInfoPrinterPass manually, or it gets printed automatically when I WriteBitcodeToFile? -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim

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.

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. As far as I remember (from the 2010 meeting), the idea was to replace and deprecate DIFactory. I'm not saying we

Hi All, DIFactory interface, part of DebugInfo.h, is used to emit LLVM IR constructs to encode debugging information. We are replacing this interface with new simple interface, DIBuilder. Here is one example that demonstrates differences between two interfaces. To create debug information entries to encode volatile type one would use following call in a language front end,

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > Hi All, > DIFactory interface, part of DebugInfo.h, is used to emit LLVM IR constructs > to encode debugging information. We are replacing this interface with new > simple interface, DIBuilder. > Here is one example that demonstrates differences between two interfaces. To > create debug information

On 7 September 2010 16:49, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > Your recent changes mentioned below would change correctness of debug info, > but it would unlikely to impact structure of DWARF generated. And somehow, > this structure is invalid in your case. I was hoping for a quick-fix on the assumptions of DwarfDebug about Subprograms' MDNodes, but it might be

On Sep 7, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 7 September 2010 16:49, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: >> Your recent changes mentioned below would change correctness of debug info, >> but it would unlikely to impact structure of DWARF generated. And somehow, >> this structure is invalid in your case. > > I was hoping for a quick-fix on the

On Feb 18, 2011, at 8:31 PM, Talin wrote: > 2) There's no means to set TheCU other than creating a new compile unit. This means that you have to generate all of the debug info for your module with a single DIBuilder instance, since there's no way to use a pre-existing compile unit. TheCU is an internal debug info information that FE should not care about. DIBuilder is meant to use for

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:

On 14 July 2010 18:21, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> wrote: > Use Create* methods to create basic debug info. There is not any > tutorial document explaining how to generated basic debug info. I got that far... ;) I could prepare a how-to when I'm finished, if that interests you. > It is encapsulating how debug info is encoded. Earlier it was using >