maxjhandsome
/
llvm-project
forked from OSchip/llvm-project
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
llvm-project/llvm/test/DebugInfo/cross-cu-linkonce.ll

74 lines
3.8 KiB
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
; REQUIRES: object-emission
; RUN: %llc_dwarf -O0 -filetype=obj < %s | llvm-dwarfdump -debug-dump=info - | FileCheck %s
; Built from source:
; $ clang++ a.cpp b.cpp -g -c -emit-llvm
; $ llvm-link a.bc b.bc -o ab.bc
; $ cat a.cpp
; # 1 "func.h"
; inline int func(int i) {
; return i * 2;
; }
; int (*x)(int) = &func;
; $ cat b.cpp
; # 1 "func.h"
; inline int func(int i) {
; return i * 2;
; }
; int (*y)(int) = &func;
; CHECK: DW_TAG_compile_unit
; CHECK: DW_TAG_subprogram
; CHECK-NOT: DW_TAG
; CHECK: DW_AT_name {{.*}} "func"
; CHECK: DW_TAG_compile_unit
; CHECK-NOT: DW_TAG_subprogram
@x = global i32 (i32)* @_Z4funci, align 8
@y = global i32 (i32)* @_Z4funci, align 8
; Function Attrs: inlinehint nounwind uwtable
define linkonce_odr i32 @_Z4funci(i32 %i) #0 {
%1 = alloca i32, align 4
store i32 %i, i32* %1, align 4
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata !{i32* %1}, metadata !20, metadata !{metadata !"0x102"}), !dbg !21
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
%2 = load i32* %1, align 4, !dbg !22
%3 = mul nsw i32 %2, 2, !dbg !22
ret i32 %3, !dbg !22
}
; Function Attrs: nounwind readnone
Move the complex address expression out of DIVariable and into an extra argument of the llvm.dbg.declare/llvm.dbg.value intrinsics. Previously, DIVariable was a variable-length field that has an optional reference to a Metadata array consisting of a variable number of complex address expressions. In the case of OpPiece expressions this is wasting a lot of storage in IR, because when an aggregate type is, e.g., SROA'd into all of its n individual members, the IR will contain n copies of the DIVariable, all alike, only differing in the complex address reference at the end. By making the complex address into an extra argument of the dbg.value/dbg.declare intrinsics, all of the pieces can reference the same variable and the complex address expressions can be uniqued across the CU, too. Down the road, this will allow us to move other flags, such as "indirection" out of the DIVariable, too. The new intrinsics look like this: declare void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata %storage, metadata %var, metadata %expr) declare void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata %storage, i64 %offset, metadata %var, metadata %expr) This patch adds a new LLVM-local tag to DIExpressions, so we can detect and pretty-print DIExpression metadata nodes. What this patch doesn't do: This patch does not touch the "Indirect" field in DIVariable; but moving that into the expression would be a natural next step. http://reviews.llvm.org/D4919 rdar://problem/17994491 Thanks to dblaikie and dexonsmith for reviewing this patch! Note: I accidentally committed a bogus older version of this patch previously. llvm-svn: 218787
2014-10-02 02:55:02 +08:00
declare void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata, metadata, metadata) #1
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
attributes #0 = { inlinehint nounwind uwtable "less-precise-fpmad"="false" "no-frame-pointer-elim"="true" "no-frame-pointer-elim-non-leaf" "no-infs-fp-math"="false" "no-nans-fp-math"="false" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "unsafe-fp-math"="false" "use-soft-float"="false" }
attributes #1 = { nounwind readnone }
!llvm.dbg.cu = !{!0, !13}
!llvm.module.flags = !{!17, !18}
!llvm.ident = !{!19, !19}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!0 = metadata !{metadata !"0x11\004\00clang version 3.5.0 \000\00\000\00\001", metadata !1, metadata !2, metadata !2, metadata !3, metadata !10, metadata !2} ; [ DW_TAG_compile_unit ] [/tmp/dbginfo/a.cpp] [DW_LANG_C_plus_plus]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!1 = metadata !{metadata !"a.cpp", metadata !"/tmp/dbginfo"}
!2 = metadata !{}
!3 = metadata !{metadata !4}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!4 = metadata !{metadata !"0x2e\00func\00func\00_Z4funci\001\000\001\000\006\00256\000\001", metadata !5, metadata !6, metadata !7, null, i32 (i32)* @_Z4funci, null, null, metadata !2} ; [ DW_TAG_subprogram ] [line 1] [def] [func]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!5 = metadata !{metadata !"func.h", metadata !"/tmp/dbginfo"}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!6 = metadata !{metadata !"0x29", metadata !5} ; [ DW_TAG_file_type ] [/tmp/dbginfo/func.h]
!7 = metadata !{metadata !"0x15\00\000\000\000\000\000\000", i32 0, null, null, metadata !8, null, null, null} ; [ DW_TAG_subroutine_type ] [line 0, size 0, align 0, offset 0] [from ]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!8 = metadata !{metadata !9, metadata !9}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!9 = metadata !{metadata !"0x24\00int\000\0032\0032\000\000\005", null, null} ; [ DW_TAG_base_type ] [int] [line 0, size 32, align 32, offset 0, enc DW_ATE_signed]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!10 = metadata !{metadata !11}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!11 = metadata !{metadata !"0x34\00x\00x\00\004\000\001", null, metadata !6, metadata !12, i32 (i32)** @x, null} ; [ DW_TAG_variable ] [x] [line 4] [def]
!12 = metadata !{metadata !"0xf\00\000\0064\0064\000\000", null, null, metadata !7} ; [ DW_TAG_pointer_type ] [line 0, size 64, align 64, offset 0] [from ]
!13 = metadata !{metadata !"0x11\004\00clang version 3.5.0 \000\00\000\00\001", metadata !14, metadata !2, metadata !2, metadata !3, metadata !15, metadata !2} ; [ DW_TAG_compile_unit ] [/tmp/dbginfo/b.cpp] [DW_LANG_C_plus_plus]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!14 = metadata !{metadata !"b.cpp", metadata !"/tmp/dbginfo"}
!15 = metadata !{metadata !16}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!16 = metadata !{metadata !"0x34\00y\00y\00\004\000\001", null, metadata !6, metadata !12, i32 (i32)** @y, null} ; [ DW_TAG_variable ] [y] [line 4] [def]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!17 = metadata !{i32 2, metadata !"Dwarf Version", i32 4}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!18 = metadata !{i32 1, metadata !"Debug Info Version", i32 2}
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!19 = metadata !{metadata !"clang version 3.5.0 "}
Revert "Revert "DI: Fold constant arguments into a single MDString"" This reverts commit r218918, effectively reapplying r218914 after fixing an Ocaml bindings test and an Asan crash. The root cause of the latter was a tightened-up check in `DILexicalBlock::Verify()`, so I'll file a PR to investigate who requires the loose check (and why). Original commit message follows. -- This patch addresses the first stage of PR17891 by folding constant arguments together into a single MDString. Integers are stringified and a `\0` character is used as a separator. Part of PR17891. Note: I've attached my testcases upgrade scripts to the PR. If I've just broken your out-of-tree testcases, they might help. llvm-svn: 219010
2014-10-04 04:01:09 +08:00
!20 = metadata !{metadata !"0x101\00i\0016777217\000", metadata !4, metadata !6, metadata !9} ; [ DW_TAG_arg_variable ] [i] [line 1]
DebugInfo: Test linkonce-odr functions under LTO. This was previously regressed/broken by r192749 (reverted due to this issue in r192938) and I was about to break it again by accident with some more invasive changes that deal with the subprogram lists. So to avoid that and further issues - here's a test. It's a pretty basic test - in both r192749 and my impending case, this test would crash, but checking the basics (that we put a subprogram in just one of the two CUs) seems like a good start. We still get this wrong in weird ways if the linkonce-odr function happens to not be identical in the metadata (because it's defined in two different files (hence the # line directives in this test), etc) even though it meets the language requirements (identical token stream) for such a thing. That results in two subprogram DIEs, but only one of them gets the parameter and high/low pc information, etc. We probably need to use the DIRef infrastructure to deduplicate functions as we do types to address this issue - or perhaps teach the BC linker to remove the duplicate entries in subprogram lists? llvm-svn: 209614
2014-05-26 14:44:52 +08:00
!21 = metadata !{i32 1, i32 0, metadata !4, null}
!22 = metadata !{i32 2, i32 0, metadata !4, null}