This came out of a recent discussion on llvm-dev
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042). Currently the Verifier will strip
the debug info metadata from a module if it finds the dbeug info to be
malformed. This feature is very valuable since it allows us to improve
the Verifier by making it stricter without breaking bcompatibility,
but arguable the Verifier pass should not be modifying the IR. This
patch moves the stripping of broken debug info into AutoUpgrade
(UpgradeDebugInfo to be precise), which is a much better location for
this since the stripping of malformed (i.e., produced by older, buggy
versions of Clang) is a (harsh) form of AutoUpgrade.
This change is mostly NFC in nature, the one big difference is the
behavior when LLVM module passes are introducing malformed debug
info. Prior to this patch, a NoAsserts build would have printed a
warning and stripped the debug info, after this patch the Verifier
will report a fatal error. I believe this behavior is actually more
desirable anyway.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38184
llvm-svn: 314699
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
Adrian Prantl