RPCS3/llvm-mirror
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git synced 2024-10-23 21:13:02 +02:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity
4bb4e5ab94
llvm-mirror/test/DebugInfo/X86/dw_op_minus_direct.ll

58 lines
2.3 KiB
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

Fix LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece in DWARF expressions. LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece is incorrect and a based on a misunderstanding of the wording in the DWARF specification. The offset argument of DW_OP_bit_piece refers to the offset into the location that is on the top of the DWARF expression stack, and not an offset into the source variable. This has since also been clarified in the DWARF specification. This patch fixes all uses of DW_OP_bit_piece to emit the correct offset and simplifies the DwarfExpression class to semi-automaticaly emit empty DW_OP_pieces to adjust the offset of the source variable, thus simplifying the code using DwarfExpression. While this is an incompatible bugfix, in practice I don't expect this to be much of a problem since LLVM's old interpretation and the correct interpretation of DW_OP_bit_piece differ only when there are gaps in the fragmented locations of the described variables or if individual fragments are smaller than a byte. LLDB at least won't interpret locations with gaps in them because is has no way to present undefined bits in a variable, and there is a high probability that an old-form expression will be malformed when interpreted correctly, because the DW_OP_bit_piece offset will be outside of the location at the top of the stack. As a nice side-effect, this patch enables us to use a more efficient encoding for subregisters: In order to express a sub-register at a non-zero offset we now use a DW_OP_bit_piece instead of shifting the value into place manually. This patch also adds missing test coverage for code paths that weren't exercised before. <rdar://problem/29335809> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27550 llvm-svn: 289266
2016-12-09 21:43:40 +01:00
; Test dwarf codegen of DW_OP_minus.
; RUN: llc -filetype=obj < %s | llvm-dwarfdump - | FileCheck %s
Don't emit locations that need a DW_OP_stack_value in DWARF 2 & 3. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32382 llvm-svn: 300883
2017-04-20 22:42:33 +02:00
; RUN: llc -dwarf-version=2 -filetype=obj < %s | llvm-dwarfdump - \
; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=DWARF2
; RUN: llc -dwarf-version=3 -filetype=obj < %s | llvm-dwarfdump - \
; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=DWARF2
Fix LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece in DWARF expressions. LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece is incorrect and a based on a misunderstanding of the wording in the DWARF specification. The offset argument of DW_OP_bit_piece refers to the offset into the location that is on the top of the DWARF expression stack, and not an offset into the source variable. This has since also been clarified in the DWARF specification. This patch fixes all uses of DW_OP_bit_piece to emit the correct offset and simplifies the DwarfExpression class to semi-automaticaly emit empty DW_OP_pieces to adjust the offset of the source variable, thus simplifying the code using DwarfExpression. While this is an incompatible bugfix, in practice I don't expect this to be much of a problem since LLVM's old interpretation and the correct interpretation of DW_OP_bit_piece differ only when there are gaps in the fragmented locations of the described variables or if individual fragments are smaller than a byte. LLDB at least won't interpret locations with gaps in them because is has no way to present undefined bits in a variable, and there is a high probability that an old-form expression will be malformed when interpreted correctly, because the DW_OP_bit_piece offset will be outside of the location at the top of the stack. As a nice side-effect, this patch enables us to use a more efficient encoding for subregisters: In order to express a sub-register at a non-zero offset we now use a DW_OP_bit_piece instead of shifting the value into place manually. This patch also adds missing test coverage for code paths that weren't exercised before. <rdar://problem/29335809> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27550 llvm-svn: 289266
2016-12-09 21:43:40 +01:00
; This was derived manually from:
; int inc(int i) {
; return i+1;
; }
Don't emit locations that need a DW_OP_stack_value in DWARF 2 & 3. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32382 llvm-svn: 300883
2017-04-20 22:42:33 +02:00
; DWARF2: .debug_info
; DWARF2: DW_TAG_formal_parameter
; DWARF2-NEXT: DW_AT_name {{.*}}"i"
; DWARF2-NOT: DW_AT_location
Fix LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece in DWARF expressions. LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece is incorrect and a based on a misunderstanding of the wording in the DWARF specification. The offset argument of DW_OP_bit_piece refers to the offset into the location that is on the top of the DWARF expression stack, and not an offset into the source variable. This has since also been clarified in the DWARF specification. This patch fixes all uses of DW_OP_bit_piece to emit the correct offset and simplifies the DwarfExpression class to semi-automaticaly emit empty DW_OP_pieces to adjust the offset of the source variable, thus simplifying the code using DwarfExpression. While this is an incompatible bugfix, in practice I don't expect this to be much of a problem since LLVM's old interpretation and the correct interpretation of DW_OP_bit_piece differ only when there are gaps in the fragmented locations of the described variables or if individual fragments are smaller than a byte. LLDB at least won't interpret locations with gaps in them because is has no way to present undefined bits in a variable, and there is a high probability that an old-form expression will be malformed when interpreted correctly, because the DW_OP_bit_piece offset will be outside of the location at the top of the stack. As a nice side-effect, this patch enables us to use a more efficient encoding for subregisters: In order to express a sub-register at a non-zero offset we now use a DW_OP_bit_piece instead of shifting the value into place manually. This patch also adds missing test coverage for code paths that weren't exercised before. <rdar://problem/29335809> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27550 llvm-svn: 289266
2016-12-09 21:43:40 +01:00
; CHECK: Beginning address offset: 0x0000000000000000
; CHECK: Ending address offset: 0x0000000000000004
PR32382: Fix emitting complex DWARF expressions. The DWARF specification knows 3 kinds of non-empty simple location descriptions: 1. Register location descriptions - describe a variable in a register - consist of only a DW_OP_reg 2. Memory location descriptions - describe the address of a variable 3. Implicit location descriptions - describe the value of a variable - end with DW_OP_stack_value & friends The existing DwarfExpression code is pretty much ignorant of these restrictions. This used to not matter because we only emitted very short expressions that we happened to get right by accident. This patch makes DwarfExpression aware of the rules defined by the DWARF standard and now chooses the right kind of location description for each expression being emitted. This would have been an NFC commit (for the existing testsuite) if not for the way that clang describes captured block variables. Based on how the previous code in LLVM emitted locations, DW_OP_deref operations that should have come at the end of the expression are put at its beginning. Fixing this means changing the semantics of DIExpression, so this patch bumps the version number of DIExpression and implements a bitcode upgrade. There are two major changes in this patch: I had to fix the semantics of dbg.declare for describing function arguments. After this patch a dbg.declare always takes the *address* of a variable as the first argument, even if the argument is not an alloca. When lowering a DBG_VALUE, the decision of whether to emit a register location description or a memory location description depends on the MachineLocation — register machine locations may get promoted to memory locations based on their DIExpression. (Future) optimization passes that want to salvage implicit debug location for variables may do so by appending a DW_OP_stack_value. For example: DBG_VALUE, [RBP-8] --> DW_OP_fbreg -8 DBG_VALUE, RAX --> DW_OP_reg0 +0 DBG_VALUE, RAX, DIExpression(DW_OP_deref) --> DW_OP_reg0 +0 All testcases that were modified were regenerated from clang. I also added source-based testcases for each of these to the debuginfo-tests repository over the last week to make sure that no synchronized bugs slip in. The debuginfo-tests compile from source and run the debugger. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32382 <rdar://problem/31205000> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31439 llvm-svn: 300522
2017-04-18 03:21:53 +02:00
; CHECK: Location description: 70 00 10 ff ff ff ff 0f 1a 10 01 1c 9f
; rax+0, constu 0xffffffff, and, constu 0x00000001, minus, stack-value
Fix LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece in DWARF expressions. LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece is incorrect and a based on a misunderstanding of the wording in the DWARF specification. The offset argument of DW_OP_bit_piece refers to the offset into the location that is on the top of the DWARF expression stack, and not an offset into the source variable. This has since also been clarified in the DWARF specification. This patch fixes all uses of DW_OP_bit_piece to emit the correct offset and simplifies the DwarfExpression class to semi-automaticaly emit empty DW_OP_pieces to adjust the offset of the source variable, thus simplifying the code using DwarfExpression. While this is an incompatible bugfix, in practice I don't expect this to be much of a problem since LLVM's old interpretation and the correct interpretation of DW_OP_bit_piece differ only when there are gaps in the fragmented locations of the described variables or if individual fragments are smaller than a byte. LLDB at least won't interpret locations with gaps in them because is has no way to present undefined bits in a variable, and there is a high probability that an old-form expression will be malformed when interpreted correctly, because the DW_OP_bit_piece offset will be outside of the location at the top of the stack. As a nice side-effect, this patch enables us to use a more efficient encoding for subregisters: In order to express a sub-register at a non-zero offset we now use a DW_OP_bit_piece instead of shifting the value into place manually. This patch also adds missing test coverage for code paths that weren't exercised before. <rdar://problem/29335809> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27550 llvm-svn: 289266
2016-12-09 21:43:40 +01:00
source_filename = "minus.c"
target datalayout = "e-m:o-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
target triple = "x86_64-apple-macosx10.12.0"
define i32 @inc(i32 %i) local_unnamed_addr #1 !dbg !7 {
entry:
%add = add nsw i32 %i, 1, !dbg !15
tail call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata i32 %add, i64 0, metadata !12, metadata !13), !dbg !14
ret i32 %add, !dbg !16
}
declare void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata, i64, metadata, metadata) #1
attributes #1 = { nounwind readnone }
!llvm.dbg.cu = !{!0}
!llvm.module.flags = !{!3, !4, !5}
!llvm.ident = !{!6}
!0 = distinct !DICompileUnit(language: DW_LANG_C99, file: !1, producer: "clang version 4.0.0 (trunk 286322) (llvm/trunk 286305)", isOptimized: true, runtimeVersion: 0, emissionKind: FullDebug, enums: !2)
!1 = !DIFile(filename: "minus.c", directory: "/tmp")
!2 = !{}
!3 = !{i32 2, !"Dwarf Version", i32 4}
!4 = !{i32 2, !"Debug Info Version", i32 3}
!5 = !{i32 1, !"PIC Level", i32 2}
!6 = !{!"clang version 4.0.0 (trunk 286322) (llvm/trunk 286305)"}
!7 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "inc", scope: !1, file: !1, line: 1, type: !8, isLocal: false, isDefinition: true, scopeLine: 1, flags: DIFlagPrototyped, isOptimized: true, unit: !0, variables: !11)
!8 = !DISubroutineType(types: !9)
!9 = !{!10, !10}
!10 = !DIBasicType(name: "int", size: 32, encoding: DW_ATE_signed)
!11 = !{!12}
!12 = !DILocalVariable(name: "i", arg: 1, scope: !7, file: !1, line: 1, type: !10)
PR32382: Fix emitting complex DWARF expressions. The DWARF specification knows 3 kinds of non-empty simple location descriptions: 1. Register location descriptions - describe a variable in a register - consist of only a DW_OP_reg 2. Memory location descriptions - describe the address of a variable 3. Implicit location descriptions - describe the value of a variable - end with DW_OP_stack_value & friends The existing DwarfExpression code is pretty much ignorant of these restrictions. This used to not matter because we only emitted very short expressions that we happened to get right by accident. This patch makes DwarfExpression aware of the rules defined by the DWARF standard and now chooses the right kind of location description for each expression being emitted. This would have been an NFC commit (for the existing testsuite) if not for the way that clang describes captured block variables. Based on how the previous code in LLVM emitted locations, DW_OP_deref operations that should have come at the end of the expression are put at its beginning. Fixing this means changing the semantics of DIExpression, so this patch bumps the version number of DIExpression and implements a bitcode upgrade. There are two major changes in this patch: I had to fix the semantics of dbg.declare for describing function arguments. After this patch a dbg.declare always takes the *address* of a variable as the first argument, even if the argument is not an alloca. When lowering a DBG_VALUE, the decision of whether to emit a register location description or a memory location description depends on the MachineLocation — register machine locations may get promoted to memory locations based on their DIExpression. (Future) optimization passes that want to salvage implicit debug location for variables may do so by appending a DW_OP_stack_value. For example: DBG_VALUE, [RBP-8] --> DW_OP_fbreg -8 DBG_VALUE, RAX --> DW_OP_reg0 +0 DBG_VALUE, RAX, DIExpression(DW_OP_deref) --> DW_OP_reg0 +0 All testcases that were modified were regenerated from clang. I also added source-based testcases for each of these to the debuginfo-tests repository over the last week to make sure that no synchronized bugs slip in. The debuginfo-tests compile from source and run the debugger. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32382 <rdar://problem/31205000> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31439 llvm-svn: 300522
2017-04-18 03:21:53 +02:00
!13 = !DIExpression(DW_OP_minus, 1, DW_OP_stack_value)
Fix LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece in DWARF expressions. LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece is incorrect and a based on a misunderstanding of the wording in the DWARF specification. The offset argument of DW_OP_bit_piece refers to the offset into the location that is on the top of the DWARF expression stack, and not an offset into the source variable. This has since also been clarified in the DWARF specification. This patch fixes all uses of DW_OP_bit_piece to emit the correct offset and simplifies the DwarfExpression class to semi-automaticaly emit empty DW_OP_pieces to adjust the offset of the source variable, thus simplifying the code using DwarfExpression. While this is an incompatible bugfix, in practice I don't expect this to be much of a problem since LLVM's old interpretation and the correct interpretation of DW_OP_bit_piece differ only when there are gaps in the fragmented locations of the described variables or if individual fragments are smaller than a byte. LLDB at least won't interpret locations with gaps in them because is has no way to present undefined bits in a variable, and there is a high probability that an old-form expression will be malformed when interpreted correctly, because the DW_OP_bit_piece offset will be outside of the location at the top of the stack. As a nice side-effect, this patch enables us to use a more efficient encoding for subregisters: In order to express a sub-register at a non-zero offset we now use a DW_OP_bit_piece instead of shifting the value into place manually. This patch also adds missing test coverage for code paths that weren't exercised before. <rdar://problem/29335809> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27550 llvm-svn: 289266
2016-12-09 21:43:40 +01:00
!14 = !DILocation(line: 1, column: 13, scope: !7)
!15 = !DILocation(line: 2, column: 11, scope: !7)
!16 = !DILocation(line: 2, column: 3, scope: !7)
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink