This change simplifies code that has to deal with
DIGlobalVariableExpression and mirrors how we treat DIExpressions in
debug info intrinsics. Before this change there were two ways of
representing empty expressions on globals, a nullptr and an empty
!DIExpression().
If someone needs to upgrade out-of-tree testcases:
perl -pi -e 's/(!DIGlobalVariableExpression\(var: ![0-9]*)\)/\1, expr: !DIExpression())/g' <MYTEST.ll>
will catch 95%.
llvm-svn: 312144
This patch renumbers the metadata nodes in debug info testcases after
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26769. This is a separate patch because it
causes so much churn. This was implemented with a python script that
pipes the testcases through llvm-as - | llvm-dis - and then goes
through the original and new output side-by side to insert all
comments at a close-enough location.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27765
llvm-svn: 290292
This patch implements PR31013 by introducing a
DIGlobalVariableExpression that holds a pair of DIGlobalVariable and
DIExpression.
Currently, DIGlobalVariables holds a DIExpression. This is not the
best way to model this:
(1) The DIGlobalVariable should describe the source level variable,
not how to get to its location.
(2) It makes it unsafe/hard to update the expressions when we call
replaceExpression on the DIGLobalVariable.
(3) It makes it impossible to represent a global variable that is in
more than one location (e.g., a variable with multiple
DW_OP_LLVM_fragment-s). We also moved away from attaching the
DIExpression to DILocalVariable for the same reasons.
This reapplies r289902 with additional testcase upgrades and a change
to the Bitcode record for DIGlobalVariable, that makes upgrading the
old format unambiguous also for variables without DIExpressions.
<rdar://problem/29250149>
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31013
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26769
llvm-svn: 290153
This reverts commit 289920 (again).
I forgot to implement a Bitcode upgrade for the case where a DIGlobalVariable
has not DIExpression. Unfortunately it is not possible to safely upgrade
these variables without adding a flag to the bitcode record indicating which
version they are.
My plan of record is to roll the planned follow-up patch that adds a
unit: field to DIGlobalVariable into this patch before recomitting.
This way we only need one Bitcode upgrade for both changes (with a
version flag in the bitcode record to safely distinguish the record
formats).
Sorry for the churn!
llvm-svn: 289982
This patch implements PR31013 by introducing a
DIGlobalVariableExpression that holds a pair of DIGlobalVariable and
DIExpression.
Currently, DIGlobalVariables holds a DIExpression. This is not the
best way to model this:
(1) The DIGlobalVariable should describe the source level variable,
not how to get to its location.
(2) It makes it unsafe/hard to update the expressions when we call
replaceExpression on the DIGLobalVariable.
(3) It makes it impossible to represent a global variable that is in
more than one location (e.g., a variable with multiple
DW_OP_LLVM_fragment-s). We also moved away from attaching the
DIExpression to DILocalVariable for the same reasons.
This reapplies r289902 with additional testcase upgrades.
<rdar://problem/29250149>
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31013
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26769
llvm-svn: 289920
This patch implements PR31013 by introducing a
DIGlobalVariableExpression that holds a pair of DIGlobalVariable and
DIExpression.
Currently, DIGlobalVariables holds a DIExpression. This is not the
best way to model this:
(1) The DIGlobalVariable should describe the source level variable,
not how to get to its location.
(2) It makes it unsafe/hard to update the expressions when we call
replaceExpression on the DIGLobalVariable.
(3) It makes it impossible to represent a global variable that is in
more than one location (e.g., a variable with multiple
DW_OP_LLVM_fragment-s). We also moved away from attaching the
DIExpression to DILocalVariable for the same reasons.
<rdar://problem/29250149>
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31013
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26769
llvm-svn: 289902
DW_TAG_atomic_type was already included in Dwarf.defs and emitted correctly,
however Verifier didn't recognize it as valid.
Thus we introduce the following changes:
* Make DW_TAG_atomic_type valid tag for IR and DWARF (enabled only with -gdwarf-5)
* Add it to related docs
* Add DebugInfo tests
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26144
llvm-svn: 285624
