Added a "step-in-target" flag to "thread step-in" so if you have something like:
Process 28464 stopped
* thread #1: tid = 0x1c03, function: main , stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
frame #0: 0x0000000100000e08 a.out`main at main.c:62
61
-> 62 int A6 = complex (a(4), b(5), c(6)); // Stop here to step targetting b and hitting breakpoint.
63
and you want to get into "complex" skipping a, b and c, you can do:
(lldb) step -t complex
Process 28464 stopped
* thread #1: tid = 0x1c03, function: complex , stop reason = step in
frame #0: 0x0000000100000d0d a.out`complex at main.c:44
41
42 int complex (int first, int second, int third)
43 {
-> 44 return first + second + third; // Step in targetting complex should stop here
45 }
46
47 int main (int argc, char const *argv[])
llvm-svn: 170008
PowerPC target. This is the last of the four models, so we now have
full TLS support.
This is mostly a straightforward extension of the general dynamic model.
I had to use an additional Chain operand to tie ADDIS_DTPREL_HA to the
register copy following ADDI_TLSLD_L; otherwise everything above the
ADDIS_DTPREL_HA appeared dead and was removed.
As before, there are new test cases to test the assembly generation, and
the relocations output during integrated assembly. The expected code
gen sequence can be read in test/CodeGen/PowerPC/tls-ld.ll.
There are a couple of things I think can be done more efficiently in the
overall TLS code, so there will likely be a clean-up patch forthcoming;
but for now I want to be sure the functionality is in place.
Bill
llvm-svn: 170003
We don't handle array destructors correctly yet, but we now apply the same
hack (explicitly destroy the first element, implicitly invalidate the rest)
for multidimensional arrays that we already use for linear arrays.
<rdar://problem/12858542>
llvm-svn: 170000
call sites as tail calls unconditionally. While it's theoretically true that
this is just an optimization, it's an optimization that we very much want to
happen even at -O0, or else ARC applications become substantially harder to
debug. See r169796 for the llvm/fast-isel side of things.
rdar://12553082
llvm-svn: 169996
been used in the first place. It simply was passed to the function and to the
recursive invocations. Simply drop the parameter and update the callers for the
new signature.
Patch by Saleem Abdulrasool!
llvm-svn: 169988
When ASan replaces <alloca instruction> with
<offset into a common large alloca>, it should also patch
llvm.dbg.declare calls and replace debug info descriptors to mark
that we've replaced alloca with a value that stores an address
of the user variable, not the user variable itself.
See PR11818 for more context.
llvm-svn: 169984
- Added directory structures and build system files for the new tool.
- Extremely basic implementation of tool performs only an initial syntax check.
- Basic tests ensure syntax test works as expected.
llvm-svn: 169983
is switched of by about 0.8% (tested with int i<N>).
Additionally, this puts computing the diagnostic class into the hot
path more when parsing, in preparation for upcoming optimizations
in this area.
llvm-svn: 169976
Add R_ARM_NONE and R_ARM_PREL31 relocation types
to MCExpr. Both of them will be used while
generating .ARM.extab and .ARM.exidx sections.
llvm-svn: 169965
the option to print the runtime-specific description has been modified in the frame variable, memory read and expression command.
All three commands now support a --object-description option, with a shortcut of -O (uppercase letter o)
This is a breaking change:
frame variable used --objc as the long option name
expression used -o as a shortcut
memory read uses --objd as the long option name
Hopefully, most users won't be affected by the change since people tend to access "expression --object-description" under the alias "po" which still works
The test suite has been tweaked accordingly.
llvm-svn: 169961
mention the inline memcpy / memset expansion code is a mess?
This patch split the ZeroOrLdSrc argument into two: IsMemset and ZeroMemset.
The first indicates whether it is expanding a memset or a memcpy / memmove.
The later is whether the memset is a memset of zero. It's totally possible
(likely even) that targets may want to do different things for memcpy and
memset of zero.
llvm-svn: 169959
Chad Rosier