-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.6k
[DWARF] Add option to add linkage_names to call_origin declaration refs #89640
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ | ||
; RUN: llc %s --filetype=obj -o - -dwarf-linkage-names=Abstract -add-linkage-names-to-declaration-call-origins=false \ | ||
; RUN: | llvm-dwarfdump - | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=COMMON,DISABLE --implicit-check-not=DW_AT_linkage_name | ||
; RUN: llc %s --filetype=obj -o - -dwarf-linkage-names=Abstract -add-linkage-names-to-declaration-call-origins=true \ | ||
; RUN: | llvm-dwarfdump - | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=COMMON,ENABLE --implicit-check-not=DW_AT_linkage_name | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do we want more RUN lines showing default varies with tuning? I'm inclined to think it's not super necessary but curious what other reviewers think. |
||
;; Check that -add-linkage-names-to-declaration-call-origins controls whether | ||
;; linkage names are added to declarations referenced by DW_AT_call_origin | ||
;; attributes. | ||
;; | ||
;; $ cat test.cpp | ||
;; void a(); | ||
;; __attribute__((optnone)) | ||
;; void b() {} | ||
;; void c(); | ||
;; extern "C" { | ||
;; void d(); | ||
;; } | ||
;; | ||
;; void e() { | ||
;; a(); //< Reference declaration DIE (add linkage name). | ||
;; b(); //< Reference definition DIE (don't add linkage name). | ||
;; c(); //< Reference definition DIE (don't add linkage name). | ||
;; d(); //< Reference declaration DIE, but there's no linkage name. | ||
;; } | ||
;; | ||
;; __attribute__((optnone)) | ||
;; void c() {} | ||
;; $ clang++ -emit-llvm -S -O1 -g | ||
|
||
; COMMON: DW_TAG_call_site | ||
; ENABLE-NEXT: DW_AT_call_origin (0x[[a:[a-z0-9]+]] "_Z1av") | ||
; DISABLE-NEXT: DW_AT_call_origin (0x[[a:[a-z0-9]+]] "a") | ||
; COMMON: DW_TAG_call_site | ||
; COMMON-NEXT: DW_AT_call_origin (0x[[b:[a-z0-9]+]] "b") | ||
; COMMON: DW_TAG_call_site | ||
; COMMON-NEXT: DW_AT_call_origin (0x[[c:[a-z0-9]+]] "c") | ||
; COMMON: DW_TAG_call_site | ||
; COMMON-NEXT: DW_AT_call_origin (0x[[d:[a-z0-9]+]] "d") | ||
|
||
; COMMON: 0x[[a]]: DW_TAG_subprogram | ||
; COMMON: DW_AT_name ("a") | ||
; ENABLE: DW_AT_linkage_name ("_Z1av") | ||
; COMMON: 0x[[b]]: DW_TAG_subprogram | ||
; COMMON: DW_AT_name ("b") | ||
; COMMON: 0x[[c]]: DW_TAG_subprogram | ||
; COMMON: DW_AT_name ("c") | ||
; COMMON: 0x[[d]]: DW_TAG_subprogram | ||
; COMMON: DW_AT_name ("d") | ||
|
||
target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" | ||
|
||
define dso_local void @_Z1ev() local_unnamed_addr !dbg !13 { | ||
entry: | ||
tail call void @_Z1av(), !dbg !14 | ||
tail call void @_Z1bv(), !dbg !15 | ||
tail call void @_Z1cv(), !dbg !16 | ||
tail call void @d(), !dbg !17 | ||
ret void, !dbg !18 | ||
} | ||
|
||
define dso_local void @_Z1bv() local_unnamed_addr !dbg !9 { | ||
entry: | ||
ret void, !dbg !12 | ||
} | ||
|
||
declare !dbg !19 void @_Z1av() local_unnamed_addr | ||
|
||
define dso_local void @_Z1cv() local_unnamed_addr !dbg !20 { | ||
entry: | ||
ret void, !dbg !21 | ||
} | ||
declare !dbg !22 void @d() local_unnamed_addr | ||
|
||
!llvm.dbg.cu = !{!0} | ||
!llvm.module.flags = !{!2, !3} | ||
!llvm.ident = !{!8} | ||
|
||
!0 = distinct !DICompileUnit(language: DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_14, file: !1, producer: "clang version 19.0.0git", isOptimized: true, runtimeVersion: 0, emissionKind: FullDebug, splitDebugInlining: false, nameTableKind: None) | ||
!1 = !DIFile(filename: "test.cpp", directory: "/") | ||
!2 = !{i32 7, !"Dwarf Version", i32 5} | ||
!3 = !{i32 2, !"Debug Info Version", i32 3} | ||
!8 = !{!"clang version 19.0.0"} | ||
!9 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "b", linkageName: "_Z1bv", scope: !1, file: !1, line: 3, type: !10, scopeLine: 3, flags: DIFlagPrototyped | DIFlagAllCallsDescribed, spFlags: DISPFlagDefinition | DISPFlagOptimized, unit: !0) | ||
!10 = !DISubroutineType(types: !11) | ||
!11 = !{null} | ||
!12 = !DILocation(line: 3, column: 11, scope: !9) | ||
!13 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "e", linkageName: "_Z1ev", scope: !1, file: !1, line: 9, type: !10, scopeLine: 9, flags: DIFlagPrototyped | DIFlagAllCallsDescribed, spFlags: DISPFlagDefinition | DISPFlagOptimized, unit: !0) | ||
!14 = !DILocation(line: 10, column: 3, scope: !13) | ||
!15 = !DILocation(line: 11, column: 3, scope: !13) | ||
!16 = !DILocation(line: 12, column: 3, scope: !13) | ||
!17 = !DILocation(line: 13, column: 3, scope: !13) | ||
!18 = !DILocation(line: 14, column: 1, scope: !13) | ||
!19 = !DISubprogram(name: "a", linkageName: "_Z1av", scope: !1, file: !1, line: 1, type: !10, flags: DIFlagPrototyped, spFlags: DISPFlagOptimized) | ||
!20 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "c", linkageName: "_Z1cv", scope: !1, file: !1, line: 17, type: !10, scopeLine: 17, flags: DIFlagPrototyped | DIFlagAllCallsDescribed, spFlags: DISPFlagDefinition | DISPFlagOptimized, unit: !0) | ||
!21 = !DILocation(line: 17, column: 11, scope: !20) | ||
!22 = !DISubprogram(name: "d", scope: !1, file: !1, line: 6, type: !10, flags: DIFlagPrototyped, spFlags: DISPFlagOptimized) |
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we /generally/ try not to use/add raw cl::opts, and instead pass things through the driver/frontend flag handling? (I might be wrong, if there's substantial precedent, let me know)
& not sure how this sits with @pogo59's general premise that debugger tuning shouldn't be reachable only through the tuning flags, but should be independently accessible (does independently accessible mean supported in the driver flags, or is -Xclang/cc1/mllvm flags sufficient to meet that requirement?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
FWIW
-dwarf-linkage-names
is an-mllvm
flag too (happy to move the flag around as needed though - I don't have a strong opinion on it)