similar to: [LLVMdev] bit code file incompatibility due to debug info changes

I agree that this really needs to be fixed before 3.4... On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > Sometime over the last year, and I'm fairly certain it has been since we > released 3.3, the debug info metadata format has changed in incompatible > ways. If you try to use an older bit code file with the current compiler, > it is not

>> >> At a minimum, it seems like we need a version number in the debug info >> metadata so we can detect this situation and avoid crashing. > > > Or to put it in the terms of the IR: we need to autoupgrade the debug info > metadata just like we do intrinsics. With debug info this might (at the > worst) involve dropping old metadata. > The verifier is probably

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> >> At a minimum, it seems like we need a version number in the debug info >> >> metadata so we can detect this situation and avoid crashing. >> > >> >

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > >> At a minimum, it seems like we need a version number in the debug info > >> metadata so we can detect this situation and avoid crashing. > > > > > > Or to put it in the terms of the IR: we need to autoupgrade the debug > info > > metadata just like we do

I don't have a strong opinion on how we fix it, but I think it's really important to do something and get it done for the 3.4 release. Here's what I would do: - implement Quentin's previous proposal for back-end diagnostics (and add a diagnostic handler to Apple's linker), so that we can warn about out-of-date debug info - add a version number to the debug info metadata -

On Nov 19, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: >> Two questions: >> >> 1) Can we reopen the bugzilla PR that I filed and use that to cover the >> additional of a version number and code to ignore the debug info when the >> version number does not match? Eric has already closed it twice, so I'm >> asking this time

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> >> At a minimum, it seems like we need a version number in

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > I don't have a strong opinion on how we fix it, but I think it's really > important to do something and get it done for the 3.4 release. > I agree with everything here being a reasonable step for the 3.4 release except: > - implement Quentin's previous proposal for back-end diagnostics

Eric, why did you move the PR back to resolved/won't-fix again after I reopened it? We really need to do *something* here. I'm open to discussing any of the possible solutions that have been offered but just letting the compiler crash does not seem acceptable. On Nov 18, 2013, at 11:00 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:55

OK. That is fine with me. Saying "WONTFIX" seems to be a bit different than "let's carry on the discussion on the mailing list until we figure out what to do", though. I had intended to use that PR to track the fact that we have an issue here that I think needs to be addressed before the 3.4 release. I don't care where the discussion happens. On Nov 18, 2013, at

For the same reason that you asked me in two threads: because it's splitting the discussion up and making it more complicated. Let's keep it to one thread and then open a bug at the end when/if we have something that we can take action on. -eric On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > Eric, why did you move the PR back to

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:01 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:26 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > In the bug report, Rafael commented that the compiler should never crash, even if the debug info metadata is old. I certainly agree, and we should fix that. I don’t think that really solves this problem, at least not by itself. For one thing, if the metadata format is really changing so rapidly, how do we

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 18, 2013, at 11:36 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >>> In the bug report, Rafael commented that the compiler should never crash, even if the debug info metadata is

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:08 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:01 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu,

In the bug report, Rafael commented that the compiler should never crash, even if the debug info metadata is old. I certainly agree, and we should fix that. I don’t think that really solves this problem, at least not by itself. For one thing, if the metadata format is really changing so rapidly, how do we ensure that we have fixed all the problems and that we don’t regress? Is there a plan for

On Nov 19, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >> I don't have a strong opinion on how we fix it, but I think it's really important to do

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:08 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at

On Nov 18, 2013, at 11:36 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >> In the bug report, Rafael commented that the compiler should never crash, even if the debug info metadata is old. I certainly agree, and we should fix that. I don’t think that really solves this problem, at least

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:26 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at