- This just scratches the surface, We have pretty horrible test coverage in
this area it seems like, but this at least covers the change in r173410.
llvm-svn: 173464
Major fixed to allow reading files that are over 4GB. The main problems were that the DataExtractor was using 32 bit offsets as a data cursor, and since we mmap all of our object files we could run into cases where if we had a very large core file that was over 4GB, we were running into the 4GB boundary.
So I defined a new "lldb::offset_t" which should be used for all file offsets.
After making this change, I enabled warnings for data loss and for enexpected implicit conversions temporarily and found a ton of things that I fixed.
Any functions that take an index internally, should use "size_t" for any indexes and also should return "size_t" for any sizes of collections.
llvm-svn: 173463
This combines two small changes:
1) Put a penalty on breaking after "<"
2) Only produce a hanging indent when parameters are separated by
commas.
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
aaaaaa(new Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa));
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
aaaaaa(new Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa));
This changes one ObjC test, but AFAICT this is not according to any
style guide (neither before nor after). We probably should be aligning
on the ":" there according to:
http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/objcguide.xml?showone=Method_Invocations#Method_Invocations
llvm-svn: 173457
This warning fires on:
Operator::~Operator() {
llvm_unreachable("should never destroy an Operator");
}
That seems like a false positive. I don't see any good way to silence
the warning here, so I'm disabling it.
llvm-svn: 173455
Only for integers, pointers, and vectors of those. No floats.
Instrumentation seems very heavy, and may need to be replaced
with some approximation in the future.
llvm-svn: 173452
with an initial number of elements, instead of DenseMap, which has
zero initial elements, in order to avoid the copying of elements
when the size changes and to avoid allocating space every time
LegalizeTypes is run. This patch will not affect the memory footprint,
because DenseMap will increase the element size to 64
when the first element is added.
Patch by Wan Xiaofei.
llvm-svn: 173448
Otherwise, really long nested name specifiers can easily lead to a
violation of the column limit.
Not sure about the rules for indentation in those cases, so input is
appreciated (see tests.).
llvm-svn: 173438
Maintain separate per-node and per-tree book-keeping.
Track all instructions above a DAG node including nested subtrees.
Seperately track instructions within a subtree.
Record subtree parents.
llvm-svn: 173426
with -target i686-win32, you will see;
debug-info-static-member.cpp:11:22: error: in-class initializer for static data member of type 'const float' requires 'constexpr' specifier [-Wstatic-float-init]
const static float const_b = 3.14;
^ ~~~~
constexpr
llvm-svn: 173418
loops over instructions in the basic block or the use-def list of the
value, neither of which are really efficient when repeatedly querying
about values in the same basic block.
What's more, we already know that the CondBB is small, and so we can do
a much more efficient test by counting the uses in CondBB, and seeing if
those account for all of the uses.
Finally, we shouldn't blanket fail on any such instruction, instead we
should conservatively assume that those instructions are part of the
cost.
Note that this actually fixes a bug in the pass because
isUsedInBasicBlock has a really terrible bug in it. I'll fix that in my
next commit, but the fix for it would make this code suddenly take the
compile time hit I thought it already was taking, so I wanted to go
ahead and migrate this code to a faster & better pattern.
The bug in isUsedInBasicBlock was also causing other tests to test the
wrong thing entirely: for example we weren't actually disabling
speculation for floating point operations as intended (and tested), but
the test passed because we failed to speculate them due to the
isUsedInBasicBlock failure.
llvm-svn: 173417
Daniel Dunbar