DW_TAG_lexical_scopes inform debuggers about the instruction range for
which a given variable (or imported declaration/module/etc) is valid. If
the scope doesn't itself contain any such entities, it's a waste of
space and should be omitted.
We were correctly doing this for entirely empty leaves, but not for
intermediate nodes.
Reduces total (not just debug sections) .o file size for a bootstrap
-gmlt LLVM by 22% and bootstrap -gmlt clang executable by 13%. The wins
for a full -g build will be less as a % (and in absolute terms), but
should still be substantial - with some of that win being fewer
relocations, thus more substantiall reducing link times than fewer bytes
alone would have.
llvm-svn: 216861
Originally committed in r211723, reverted in r211724 due to failure
cases found and fixed (ArgumentPromotion: r211872, Inlining: r212065),
committed again in r212085 and reverted again in r212089 after fixing
some other cases, such as debug info subprogram lists not keeping track
of the function they represent (r212128) and then short-circuiting
things like LiveDebugVariables that build LexicalScopes for functions
that might not have full debug info.
And again, I believe the invariant actually holds for some reasonable
amount of code (but I'll keep an eye on the buildbots and see what
happens... ).
Original commit message:
PR20038: DebugInfo: Inlined call sites where the caller has debug info
but the call itself has no debug location.
This situation does bad things when inlined, so I've fixed Clang not to
produce inlinable call sites without locations when the caller has debug
info (in the one case where I could find that this occurred). This
updates the PR20038 test case to be what clang now produces, and readds
the assertion that had to be removed due to this bug.
I've also beefed up the debug info verifier to help diagnose these
issues in the future, and I hope to add checks to the inliner to just
assert-fail if it encounters this situation. If, in the future, we
decide we have to cope with this situation, the right thing to do is
probably to just remove all the DebugLocs from the inlined instructions.
llvm-svn: 212205
This reverts commit r212085.
This breaks the sanitizer bot... & I thought I'd tried pretty hard not
to do that. Guess I need to try harder.
llvm-svn: 212089
Originally committed in r211723, reverted in r211724 due to failure
cases found and fixed (ArgumentPromotion: r211872, Inlining: r212065),
and I now believe the invariant actually holds for some reasonable
amount of code (but I'll keep an eye on the buildbots and see what
happens... ).
Original commit message:
PR20038: DebugInfo: Inlined call sites where the caller has debug info
but the call itself has no debug location.
This situation does bad things when inlined, so I've fixed Clang not to
produce inlinable call sites without locations when the caller has debug
info (in the one case where I could find that this occurred). This
updates the PR20038 test case to be what clang now produces, and readds
the assertion that had to be removed due to this bug.
I've also beefed up the debug info verifier to help diagnose these
issues in the future, and I hope to add checks to the inliner to just
assert-fail if it encounters this situation. If, in the future, we
decide we have to cope with this situation, the right thing to do is
probably to just remove all the DebugLocs from the inlined instructions.
llvm-svn: 212085
Reverting this again, didn't mean to commit it - while r211872 fixes one
of the issues here, there are still others to figure out and address.
This reverts commit r211871.
llvm-svn: 211873
This situation does bad things when inlined, so I've fixed Clang not to
produce inlinable call sites without locations when the caller has debug
info (in the one case where I could find that this occurred). This
updates the PR20038 test case to be what clang now produces, and readds
the assertion that had to be removed due to this bug.
I've also beefed up the debug info verifier to help diagnose these
issues in the future, and I hope to add checks to the inliner to just
assert-fail if it encounters this situation. If, in the future, we
decide we have to cope with this situation, the right thing to do is
probably to just remove all the DebugLocs from the inlined instructions.
llvm-svn: 211723
I haven't nailed this down entirely, but this is about as small of a
test case as I can seem to construct and adequately demonstrates the
crasher. I'll continue investigating the root cause/fix(es).
llvm-svn: 210993
