similar to: [LLVMdev] Questions about debug info in LLVM 2.8

On Jan 4, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Jacob Zimmermann wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently porting some code from LLVM 2.6 to 2.8 and need to be able > to extract the debug info produced by LLVM-GCC and stored in the > compiled .bc file. However I admit I'm slightly confused about how > exactly to do that, the documentation doesn't seem to be very clear > about this, it mainly

On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 11:13 -0800, Devang Patel wrote: > On Jan 4, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Jacob Zimmermann wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'm currently porting some code from LLVM 2.6 to 2.8 and need to be able > > to extract the debug info produced by LLVM-GCC and stored in the > > compiled .bc file. However I admit I'm slightly confused about how > >

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:14 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Manman Ren

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> We still have access to types via MDNodes directly and the assertion that >> assumes all accesses to DITypes are accessing the resolved DIType will fire >> >> i.e

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:41 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:14 PM, David Blaikie

Folks, I am newbie to llvm! I am writing a simple pass that inherits from ModulePass. I override the runOnModule method. In the method, i am attempting to print all the function in the module and the source-file they appear in. I could print the name of the function using the Module::iterator. I am, however, not able to figure-out the way to identify the source-file for a given

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > > > Thanks for the testing case. Most of the time is spent on debug info > > verifier. > > I fixed a bug in r194974, now it takes too long to run debug info > >

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > Thanks for the testing case. Most of the time is spent on debug info > verifier. > I fixed a bug in r194974, now it takes too long to run debug info > verification. > > Debug info verifier is part of the verifier which is a Function Pass. Tot > currently tries to pull all

We still have access to types via MDNodes directly and the assertion that assumes all accesses to DITypes are accessing the resolved DIType will fire i.e assert(Ty == resolve(Ty.getRef())) One example is the access to DIType via DIArray in SubroutineType. If all elements in the type array are DITypes we can create a DITypeArray and use that for SubroutineType's type array instead. But we

Hi Bill, Thanks for the testing case. Most of the time is spent on debug info verifier. I fixed a bug in r194974, now it takes too long to run debug info verification. Debug info verifier is part of the verifier which is a Function Pass. Tot currently tries to pull all reachable debug info MDNodes in each function, which is too time-consuming. The correct fix seems to be separating debug info

I think it might be. I’m attaching a preprocessed file that can show the problem. Compile it with ToT. $ clang++ -g -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fno-common -Woverloaded-virtual -Wcast-qual -fno-strict-aliasing -m64 -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wall -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcovered-switch-default -Wno-uninitialized -Wno-missing-field-initializers -c

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

On 09.08.2012, at 19:43, "Gaster, Benedict" <Benedict.Gaster at amd.com> wrote: > I’m probably missing something simple here but in: > > CGDebugInfo.h: > > std::vector<std::pair<void *, llvm::WeakVH> >ReplaceMap; > > but then in > > CGDebugInfo.cpp: > > llvm::DIType TC = getTypeOrNull(Ty); > > void * v =

On 07/27/2015 10:59 AM, Rodney M. Bates wrote: > > > On 07/25/2015 08:57 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 at 06:48 Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop <mailto:rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>> wrote: >> >> In trying to write a C binding for DIBuilder of llvm 3.6.1, I can't see a way to unwrap >> llvm::DITypeRef, declared in

Hi Bill Is this a recent regression? I recently changed the debug info verifier to fix a bug. Thanks, Manman > On Nov 17, 2013, at 5:52 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > > I think that debug info is slowing a self-hosting build down. This build has been going for ages now and shows no sign of quitting. To reproduce, build a Release+Asserts build of clang. Then

On 07/25/2015 08:57 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 at 06:48 Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop <mailto:rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>> wrote: > > In trying to write a C binding for DIBuilder of llvm 3.6.1, I can't see a way to unwrap > llvm::DITypeRef, declared in include/llvm/IR/DebugInfo.h. This is a class with one > data member, a

Hi Ben, Thanks that helped a lot. The problem seems to be that with the move to C++11 we now have: void std::vector<_Ty>::push_back(std::pair<_Ty1,_Ty2> &&)' and there no conversion operator that can be applied to convert: 'std::pair<_Ty1,_Ty2>' to 'std::pair<_Ty3,_Ty4> && Where: [ _Ty1=void *,

I think that debug info is slowing a self-hosting build down. This build has been going for ages now and shows no sign of quitting. To reproduce, build a Release+Asserts build of clang. Then use that to build a Debug+Asserts version. Include all of the bells and whistles, like the clang-extras and compiler-rt libraries. The reason I suspect debug info is because of this stack trace: [morbo:llvm]

I forgot to mention this in my initial email. The build of LLVM that I was using was commit a0d5d7aed8e177cea381b3d054d80c212ece9f2c The date on the commit is: Date: Fri Sep 26 12:34:06 2014 Also: Today I grabbed the ToT llvm/clang/clang-extra-tools and I’m working on getting my code to be compatible with it. I can switch back and forth between the current ToT llvm and the old one. Thanks,

> On 2015-Jan-19, at 12:38, Frédéric Riss <friss at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 19, 2015, at 12:04 PM, Christian Schafmeister <chris.schaf at verizon.net> wrote: >> >> >> I forgot to mention this in my initial email. >> >> The build of LLVM that I was using was commit a0d5d7aed8e177cea381b3d054d80c212ece9f2c >> The date on the