similar to: Adding accelerator tables to existing linked DWARF files

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 8000 matches similar to: "Adding accelerator tables to existing linked DWARF files"

2020 Mar 02
3
Adding accelerator tables to existing linked DWARF files
> On Feb 28, 2020, at 11:25 PM, Fangrui Song via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 2020-02-28, Greg Clayton via llvm-dev wrote: >> I am looking to create a tool that can add Apple or DWARF5 accelerator tables to fully linked executables that contain DWARF. This will help us benchmark how much accelerator tables can improve the debugging experience as
2020 Mar 02
3
Adding accelerator tables to existing linked DWARF files
I'd like it... Adrian? Fred? -eric On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:44 PM Greg Clayton <clayborg at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes. I am fine with adding ELF support to llvm-dsymutil if that is the way > people think we should go? > > On Mar 2, 2020, at 3:33 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > Which seems like what we'd want dsymutil to do anyhow? >
2020 Mar 02
2
Adding accelerator tables to existing linked DWARF files
Which seems like what we'd want dsymutil to do anyhow? -eric On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:21 PM Greg Clayton via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On other options would be to make a new "llvm-dwarfld" tool, where most of > the functionality would exist llvm/lib/DwarfLinker and other locations. The > idea would be to do any post processing to DWARF using
2020 Mar 03
3
Adding accelerator tables to existing linked DWARF files
Is there/could you further explain the use-case for adding an index to an existing binary? Certainly not the worst idea/could come in handy sometimes, but you mention benchmarking - is the benefit of not recompiling/relinking that significant to such experiments? If it's not for use in a common workflow, but only in a compiler/debugger development workflow, it doesn't seem so important to
2016 Nov 17
3
DWARF Generator
I have recently been modifying the DWARF parser and have more patches planned and I want to be able to add unit tests that test the internal llvm DWARF APIs to ensure they continue to work and also validate the changes that I am making. There are not many DWARF unit tests other than very simple ones that test DWARF forms currently. I would like to expand this to include many more tests. I had
2016 Nov 18
4
DWARF Generator
> On Nov 17, 2016, at 3:40 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 3:12 PM Greg Clayton via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I have recently been modifying the DWARF parser and have more patches planned and I want to be able to add unit tests that test the internal llvm DWARF APIs to ensure they continue to
2016 Nov 18
2
DWARF Generator
> On Nov 17, 2016, at 5:40 PM, Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Greg Clayton [mailto:gclayton at apple.com] >> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 5:01 PM >> To: David Blaikie >> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Robinson, Paul; Eric Christopher; Adrian >> Prantl >> Subject: Re:
2016 Nov 18
2
DWARF Generator
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:18 AM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:43 AM Greg Clayton <gclayton at apple.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 17, 2016, at 5:40 PM, Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Greg Clayton
2020 Nov 09
1
Fragmented DWARF
On 06.11.2020 13:32, James Henderson wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 21:02, Alexey Lapshin <avl.lapshin at gmail.com > <mailto:avl.lapshin at gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi James, > > On 05.11.2020 17:59, James Henderson wrote: >> (Resending with history trimmed to avoid it getting stuck in >> moderator queue). >>
2020 Aug 25
9
[Proposal][Debuginfo] dsymutil-like tool for ELF.
Hi,   We propose llvm-dwarfutil - a dsymutil-like tool for ELF.   Any thoughts on this?   Thanks in advance, Alexey. ====================================================================== llvm-dwarfutil(Apndx A) - is a tool that is used for processing debug info(DWARF) located in built binary files to improve debug info quality, reduce debug info size and accelerate debug info processing.
2020 Aug 26
3
[Proposal][Debuginfo] dsymutil-like tool for ELF.
On 26.08.2020 10:58, James Henderson wrote: > In principle, this sounds reasonable to me. I don't know enough about > dsymutil's interface to know whether it makes sense to try to make it > multi-format compatible or not. If it doesn't I'm perfectly happy for > a new tool to be added using the DWARFLinker library. > > Some more general thoughts: > 1)
2020 Sep 01
2
[Proposal][Debuginfo] dsymutil-like tool for ELF.
On 01.09.2020 06:27, David Blaikie wrote: > A quick note: The feature as currently proposed sounds like it's an > exact match for 'dwz'? Is there any benefit to this over the existing > dwz project? Is it different in some ways I'm not aware of? (I haven't > actually used dwz, so I might have some mistaken ideas about how it > should work) > > If
2020 Sep 02
2
[Proposal][Debuginfo] dsymutil-like tool for ELF.
On 01.09.2020 20:07, David Blaikie wrote: > Fair enough - thanks for clarifying the differences! (I'd still lean a > bit towards this being dwz-esque, as you say "an extension of classic dwz" I doubt a little about "llvm-dwz" since it might confuse people who would expect exactly the same behavior. But if we think of it as "an extension of classic dwz" and
2018 Nov 03
2
llvm bug 36466 fix
Hi I come across the following exception when I use the llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info target_binary: llvm-dwarfdump: /home/linux/llvm-7/llvm/lib/MC/MCRegisterInfo.cpp:87: int llvm::MCRegisterInfo::getLLVMRegNum(unsigned int, bool) const: Assertion `I != M+Size && I->FromReg == RegNum && "Invalid RegNum"' failed. Stack dump: 0. Program arguments:
2019 Apr 24
2
[DebugInfo] DWARF C API
Hi David, Sorry, I forget to attach the valgrind dump to this. I was not sure if my implementation was ok, so I wanted to ask if I've done something wrong first. Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV) Access not within mapped region at address 0xB at 0x54F4516: llvm::object::COFFObjectFile::moveSectionNext(llvm::object::DataRefImpl&) const
2020 Sep 02
2
[Proposal][Debuginfo] dsymutil-like tool for ELF.
On 02.09.2020 21:44, David Blaikie wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 9:56 AM Alexey <avl.lapshin at gmail.com > <mailto:avl.lapshin at gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On 01.09.2020 20:07, David Blaikie wrote: >> Fair enough - thanks for clarifying the differences! (I'd still >> lean a bit towards this being dwz-esque, as you say "an
2020 Aug 06
2
[Debuginfo][DWARF][LLD] Remove obsolete debug info in lld.
Hi Alexey, I should've looked at this earlier. I went through the thread again and I've made some comments, mostly from the dsymutil point of view. > Current DWARFEmitter/DWARFStreamer has an implementation for DWARF > generation, which does not support DWARF5(only debug_names table). At the > same time, there already exists code in CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfDebug.h, > which
2020 Nov 05
3
Fragmented DWARF
Hi James, On 05.11.2020 17:59, James Henderson wrote: > (Resending with history trimmed to avoid it getting stuck in moderator > queue). > > Hi Alexey, > > Just an update - I identified the cause of the "Generated debug info > is broken" error message when I tried to build things locally: the > `outStreamer` instance is initialised with the host Triple,
2018 Nov 03
2
llvm bug 36466 fix
Hi Dave I am not going to access any hardware. I am using clang to analysis the ARM binaries. The binary is 483.xalancbmk in CPU SPEC2006. When I use the optimization O0, no crash will occur. The crash occurs when I set optimization level as O1,O2,O3 and Os. If I have to recompile and rerun the tests. What version of llvm is suggested. It would be better if anyone could provide the patch on this
2020 Aug 10
2
[Debuginfo][DWARF][LLD] Remove obsolete debug info in lld.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 5:15 AM Alexey Lapshin <avl.lapshin at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Jonas, > > Thank you for the comments, please find my answers below... > > On 06.08.2020 20:39, Jonas Devlieghere wrote: > > Hi Alexey, > > I should've looked at this earlier. I went through the thread again and I've > made some comments, mostly from the dsymutil