similar to: [LLVMdev] Column information for the CodeView debug info format

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 600 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Column information for the CodeView debug info format"

2015 Oct 30
3
RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:11 AM, Dave Bartolomeo via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Proposed Design > > How Debug Info is Generated > > The CodeView type records for a compilation unit will be generated by > the front-end
2015 Oct 31
3
[cfe-dev] RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
Brief answer, but can go into detail later: If this is the right idea, lets do it for dwarf too & generalize the support to work for both. It's certainly something we've considered, to save all the complexity of representing essentially static data in an intermediate form. That said, given some of the stuff we have for lto, for example (deallocating/merging types etc) I'm not
2015 Nov 04
2
[cfe-dev] RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
The LLVMCodeView library is definitely independent of the rest of the design questions. As far as testing goes, what would be the conventional LLVM way of testing a library for file format manipulation? A test tool that converts some simple text form into a .obj containing CodeView sections, and comparing with a baseline .obj? Or would the test convert back from the .obj to some kind of text as
2015 Oct 31
3
[cfe-dev] RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
Definitely having someone who knows both formats well would be an advantage. Dave B might be in the best position to do this, so hopefully he can provide a couple more examples of areas where he has trouble expressing CV information entirely in the backend. Regardless of what everyone ends up deciding on with regards to the front-end / back-discussion, I want to suggest separating the work into
2015 Nov 01
3
[cfe-dev] RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
I also think that we should keep one representation of debug info in the LLVM IR. There would be a need to extend some of the debug info entries to support CodeView, but I think that most of the information generated today by Clang for Dwarf can be used for generating CodeView. I can think about two missing extensions that are needed to CodeView: 1. In Frontend: File Checksum, it is
2015 Oct 29
7
RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM Overview On Windows, the de facto debug information format is CodeView, most commonly encountered in the form of a .pdb file. This is the format emitted by the Visual C++, C#, and VB.NET compilers, consumed by the Visual Studio debugger and the Windows debugger (WinDbg), and exposed for read-only access via the DIA SDK. The CodeView format has never
2016 Mar 03
5
[cfe-dev] RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM
I think it'd be reasonable to at least figure out a good way to do type references consistently across the two schemes, but I'm OK with the idea of having a blob of opaque type information for different debug info formats, created by frontends (& don't mind if the library for building that blob live in LLVM or Clang for now - the DWARF one at least would probably live in LLVM
2011 Feb 12
4
[LLVMdev] [patch] Dwarf Debug info support for COFF object files
Hello All, I have created a set of patches that get dwarf debugging support working for the COFF object file. I also believe I have fixed what appears to be a bug in how line info sections are referred to from the DW_TAG_compile_unit DIE. I have run some basic tests, analyzed dumps of both the objects files and the final executables, and run a test program against mingw-gdb and everything looks
2011 Feb 24
0
[LLVMdev] [patch] Dwarf Debug info support for COFF object files
On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Nathan Jeffords wrote: > Hello All, > > I have created a set of patches that get dwarf debugging support working for the COFF object file. I also believe I have fixed what appears to be a bug in how line info sections are referred to from the DW_TAG_compile_unit DIE. I have run some basic tests, analyzed dumps of both the objects files and the final
2011 Feb 24
2
[LLVMdev] [patch] Dwarf Debug info support for COFF object files
On Feb 24, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Devang Patel wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Nathan Jeffords wrote: > >> Hello All, >> >> I have created a set of patches that get dwarf debugging support working for the COFF object file. I also believe I have fixed what appears to be a bug in how line info sections are referred to from the DW_TAG_compile_unit DIE. I have run
2018 Mar 22
0
CodeView layering
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:31 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm looking at fixing some layering violations in LLVM & came across a few > in the CodeView handling, specifically: > > lib/MC/MCCodeView includes several llvm/DebugInfo/CodeView headers > I guess MC could be made dependent on DebugInfoCodeView? But probably > these things should be
2018 Apr 01
0
CodeView layering
Looks like maybe the CodeView -> Object dependency is out of date/old/not needed any more anyway... (don't see any Object headers included from the CodeView headers or implementation, etc). Will see if going that way internally is viable & loop back if it stumbles across something. On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 5:27 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > No, Object is
2016 Aug 17
2
CodeView and "line 0" ?
I've been playing with Fred Riss's "line 0" patch for DWARF (https://reviews.llvm.org/D16569) but in adapting it for current trunk, I find the DwarfDebug stuff has been refactored to allow either DWARF or CodeView. That's all good, but the question is whether the "line 0" patch should be DWARF-specific or common. The DWARF spec explicitly states that code not
2018 Mar 21
0
CodeView layering
Yes, some of the headers and stuff that are just raw structure definitions and enums could probably be sunk into BinaryFormat.. How'd you find this? Curious why it hasn't been breaking in modules builds for a long time. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:31 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm looking at fixing some layering violations in LLVM & came across a
2018 Mar 29
0
CodeView layering
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 4:52 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 12:55 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:31 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm looking at fixing some layering violations in LLVM & came across a >>> few in the
2014 Sep 15
2
[LLVMdev] codeview debug info in Visual Studio
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 19:33:42 +0200, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com> wrote: > Basically, see my patches to LLVM from early 2014 -- they include tests, > a DI generator and a DI dumper. I'd be happy to review your patches too! Thanks. Looks like it's likely that it's one of the 0xF1 sections, the first one always has the object file name and what seems
2014 Sep 15
2
[LLVMdev] codeview debug info in Visual Studio
Hi, Is there any way to debug the codeview output of llvm from within Visual Studio? I want to use the codeview line info debug output of clang/llvm. I tried with the x86_64-pc-windows-msvc and i686-pc-windows-msvc triples and linking it into an existing project with VC++ from within the IDE and outside with link /debug. Neither option lets me debug with Visual Studio as debugger host.
2018 Mar 30
0
CodeView layering
No, Object is supposed to be an abstraction over real object files and LLVM bitcode object files. Maybe we can break the CodeView -> Object dependency. On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:23 PM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote: > It seems a little strange conceptually that object depends on > BitcodeReader. Is it possible to break that dependency? > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at
2014 Sep 15
2
[LLVMdev] codeview debug info in Visual Studio
Hi Carlo, Do you have VS2010 handy? It should read the DI fine. Unfortunately, VS2013 is not able to use the debug info we generate. It is on my plans to investigate and fix the generator, but I didn't have enough free cycles recently. -- Tim 2014-09-15 20:30 GMT+04:00 Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>: > +Timur > > Hm, this didn't work out of the box for me. > >
2018 Mar 26
2
CodeView layering
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 12:55 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:31 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm looking at fixing some layering violations in LLVM & came across a >> few in the CodeView handling, specifically: >> >> lib/MC/MCCodeView includes several llvm/DebugInfo/CodeView headers