This patch fixes an assertion failure in DwarfExpression that is
triggered when a complex fragment has exactly the size of a
subregister of the register the DBG_VALUE points to *and* there is no
DWARF encoding for the super-register.
I took the opportunity to replace/document some magic values with
static constructor functions to make this code less confusing to read.
rdar://problem/58489125
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72938
Extends DWARF expression language to express locals/globals locations. (via
target-index operands atm) (possible variants are: non-virtual registers
or address spaces)
The WebAssemblyExplicitLocals can replace virtual registers to targertindex
operand type at the time when WebAssembly backend introduces
{get,set,tee}_local instead of corresponding virtual registers.
Reviewed By: aprantl, dschuff
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52634
Summary:
Internally in LLVM's metadata we use DW_OP_entry_value operations with
the same semantics as DWARF; that is, its operand specifies the number
of bytes that the entry value covers.
At the time of emitting entry values we don't know the emitted size of
the DWARF expression that the entry value will cover. Currently the size
is hardcoded to 1 in DIExpression, and other values causes the verifier
to fail. As the size is 1, that effectively means that we can only have
valid entry values for registers that can be encoded in one byte, which
are the registers with DWARF numbers 0 to 31 (as they can be encoded as
single-byte DW_OP_reg0..DW_OP_reg31 rather than a multi-byte
DW_OP_regx). It is a bit confusing, but it seems like llvm-dwarfdump
will print an operation "correctly", even if the byte size is less than
that, which may make it seem that we emit correct DWARF for registers
with DWARF numbers > 31. If you instead use readelf for such cases, it
will interpret the number of specified bytes as a DWARF expression. This
seems like a limitation in llvm-dwarfdump.
As suggested in D66746, a way forward would be to add an internal
variant of DW_OP_entry_value, DW_OP_LLVM_entry_value, whose operand
instead specifies the number of operations that the entry value covers,
and we then translate that into the byte size at the time of emission.
In this patch that internal operation is added. This patch keeps the
limitation that a entry value can only be applied to simple register
locations, but it will fix the issue with the size operand being
incorrect for DWARF numbers > 31.
Reviewers: aprantl, vsk, djtodoro, NikolaPrica
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: jyknight, fedor.sergeev, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67492
llvm-svn: 374881
Summary:
DWARF's DW_OP_entry_value operation has two operands; the first is a
ULEB128 operand that specifies the size of the second operand, which is
a DWARF block. This means that we need to be able to pre-calculate and
emit the size of DWARF expressions before emitting them. There is
currently no interface for doing this in DwarfExpression, so this patch
introduces that.
When implementing this I initially thought about running through
DwarfExpression's emission two times; first with a temporary buffer to
emit the expression, in order to being able to calculate the size of
that emitted data. However, DwarfExpression is a quite complex state
machine, so I decided against that, as it seemed like the two runs could
get out of sync, resulting in incorrect size operands. Therefore I have
implemented this in a way that we only have to run DwarfExpression once.
The idea is to emit DWARF to a temporary buffer, for which it is
possible to query the size. The data in the temporary buffer can then be
emitted to DwarfExpression's main output.
In the case of DIEDwarfExpression, a temporary DIE is used. The values
are all allocated using the same BumpPtrAllocator as for all other DIEs,
and the values are then transferred to the real value list. In the case
of DebugLocDwarfExpression, the temporary buffer is implemented using a
BufferByteStreamer which emits to a buffer in the DwarfExpression
object.
Reviewers: aprantl, vsk, NikolaPrica, djtodoro
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67768
llvm-svn: 374879
Dump the DWARF information about call sites and call site parameters into
debug info sections.
The patch also provides an interface for the interpretation of instructions
that could load values of a call site parameters in order to generate DWARF
about the call site parameters.
([13/13] Introduce the debug entry values.)
Co-authored-by: Ananth Sowda <asowda@cisco.com>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Prica <nikola.prica@rt-rk.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Baev <ibaev@cisco.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60716
llvm-svn: 365467
Add the IR and the AsmPrinter parts for handling of the DW_OP_entry_values
DWARF operation.
([11/13] Introduce the debug entry values.)
Co-authored-by: Ananth Sowda <asowda@cisco.com>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Prica <nikola.prica@rt-rk.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Baev <ibaev@cisco.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60866
llvm-svn: 364542
The goal is to improve hwasan's error reporting for stack use-after-return by
recording enough information to allow the specific variable that was accessed
to be identified based on the pointer's tag. Currently we record the PC and
lower bits of SP for each stack frame we create (which will eventually be
enough to derive the base tag used by the stack frame) but that's not enough
to determine the specific tag for each variable, which is the stack frame's
base tag XOR a value (the "tag offset") that is unique for each variable in
a function.
In IR, the tag offset is most naturally represented as part of a location
expression on the llvm.dbg.declare instruction. However, the presence of the
tag offset in the variable's actual location expression is likely to confuse
debuggers which won't know about tag offsets, and moreover the tag offset
is not required for a debugger to determine the location of the variable on
the stack, so at the DWARF level it is represented as an attribute so that
it will be ignored by debuggers that don't know about it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63119
llvm-svn: 363635
Refactor location description kind in order to be easier for extensions
(needed for D60866).
In addition, cut off some bits from the other class fields.
Patch by Djordje Todorovic.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62002
llvm-svn: 361480
The PrologEpilogInserter need to insert a DW_OP_deref_size before
prepending a memory location expression to an already implicit
expression to avoid having the existing expression act on the memory
address instead of the value behind it.
The reason for using DW_OP_deref_size and not plain DW_OP_deref is that
big-endian targets need to read the right size as simply truncating a
larger read would yield the wrong result (LSB bytes are not at the lower
address).
This re-commit fixes issues reported in the first one. Namely deref was
inserted under wrong conditions and additionally the deref_size argument
was incorrectly encoded.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59687
llvm-svn: 359535
Introduce a DW_OP_LLVM_convert Dwarf expression pseudo op that allows
for a convenient way to perform type conversions on the Dwarf expression
stack. As an additional bonus it paves the way for using other Dwarf
v5 ops that need to reference a base_type.
The new DW_OP_LLVM_convert is used from lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
to perform sext/zext on debug values but mainly the patch is about
preparing terrain for adding other Dwarf v5 ops that need to reference a
base_type.
For Dwarf v5 the op maps to DW_OP_convert and for earlier versions a
complex shift & mask pattern is generated to emulate sext/zext.
This is a recommit of r356442 with trivial fixes for the failing tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56587
llvm-svn: 356451
Introduce a DW_OP_LLVM_convert Dwarf expression pseudo op that allows
for a convenient way to perform type conversions on the Dwarf expression
stack. As an additional bonus it paves the way for using other Dwarf
v5 ops that need to reference a base_type.
The new DW_OP_LLVM_convert is used from lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
to perform sext/zext on debug values but mainly the patch is about
preparing terrain for adding other Dwarf v5 ops that need to reference a
base_type.
For Dwarf v5 the op maps to DW_OP_convert and for earlier versions a
complex shift & mask pattern is generated to emulate sext/zext.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56587
llvm-svn: 356442
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Normalize common kinds of DWARF sub-expressions to make debug info
encoding a bit more compact:
DW_OP_constu [X < 32] -> DW_OP_litX
DW_OP_constu [all ones] -> DW_OP_lit0, DW_OP_not (64-bit only)
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51640
llvm-svn: 341457
For local variables the first DW_OP_deref is consumed by turning the
location kind into a memeory location, but that only makes sense for
values that are in a register to begin with, which cannot happen for
global variables that are attached to a symbol.
rdar://problem/39741860
This reapplies r330970 after fixing an uncovered bug in r331086 and
working around the situation caused by it.
llvm-svn: 331090
Summary:
This patch is part of 3 patches that together form a single patch, but must be introduced in stages in order not to break things.
The way that LLVM interprets DW_OP_plus in DIExpression nodes is basically that of the DW_OP_plus_uconst operator since LLVM expects an unsigned constant operand. This unnecessarily restricts the DW_OP_plus operator, preventing it from being used to describe the evaluation of runtime values on the expression stack. These patches try to align the semantics of DW_OP_plus and DW_OP_minus with that of the DWARF definition, which pops two elements off the expression stack, performs the operation and pushes the result back on the stack.
This is done in three stages:
• The first patch (LLVM) adds support for DW_OP_plus_uconst.
• The second patch (Clang) contains changes all its uses from DW_OP_plus to DW_OP_plus_uconst.
• The third patch (LLVM) changes the semantics of DW_OP_plus and DW_OP_minus to be in line with its DWARF meaning. This patch includes the bitcode upgrade from legacy DIExpressions.
Patch by Sander de Smalen.
Reviewers: echristo, pcc, aprantl
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: fhahn, javed.absar, aprantl, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33894
llvm-svn: 305386
- introduced in r300522 and found via the Swift LLDB testsuite.
The fix is to set the location kind to memory whenever an FrameIndex
location is emitted.
rdar://problem/31707602
llvm-svn: 300793
- introduced in r300522 and found via the Swift LLDB testsuite.
The fix is to set the location kind to memory whenever an FrameIndex
location is emitted.
rdar://problem/31707602
llvm-svn: 300790
The DWARF specification knows 3 kinds of non-empty simple location
descriptions:
1. Register location descriptions
- describe a variable in a register
- consist of only a DW_OP_reg
2. Memory location descriptions
- describe the address of a variable
3. Implicit location descriptions
- describe the value of a variable
- end with DW_OP_stack_value & friends
The existing DwarfExpression code is pretty much ignorant of these
restrictions. This used to not matter because we only emitted very
short expressions that we happened to get right by accident. This
patch makes DwarfExpression aware of the rules defined by the DWARF
standard and now chooses the right kind of location description for
each expression being emitted.
This would have been an NFC commit (for the existing testsuite) if not
for the way that clang describes captured block variables. Based on
how the previous code in LLVM emitted locations, DW_OP_deref
operations that should have come at the end of the expression are put
at its beginning. Fixing this means changing the semantics of
DIExpression, so this patch bumps the version number of DIExpression
and implements a bitcode upgrade.
There are two major changes in this patch:
I had to fix the semantics of dbg.declare for describing function
arguments. After this patch a dbg.declare always takes the *address*
of a variable as the first argument, even if the argument is not an
alloca.
When lowering a DBG_VALUE, the decision of whether to emit a register
location description or a memory location description depends on the
MachineLocation — register machine locations may get promoted to
memory locations based on their DIExpression. (Future) optimization
passes that want to salvage implicit debug location for variables may
do so by appending a DW_OP_stack_value. For example:
DBG_VALUE, [RBP-8] --> DW_OP_fbreg -8
DBG_VALUE, RAX --> DW_OP_reg0 +0
DBG_VALUE, RAX, DIExpression(DW_OP_deref) --> DW_OP_reg0 +0
All testcases that were modified were regenerated from clang. I also
added source-based testcases for each of these to the debuginfo-tests
repository over the last week to make sure that no synchronized bugs
slip in. The debuginfo-tests compile from source and run the debugger.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32382
<rdar://problem/31205000>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31439
llvm-svn: 300522
until the rest of the expression is known.
This is still an NFC refactoring in preparation of a subsequent bugfix.
This reapplies r298388 with a bugfix for non-physical frame registers.
llvm-svn: 298471
and mark the methods as protected.
Besides reducing the surface area of DwarfExpression, this is in
preparation for an upcoming bugfix in the DwarfExpression
implementation, for which it will be necessary to defer emitting
register operations until the rest of the expression is known.
NFC
llvm-svn: 298309
Citing http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32288
The DWARF generated by LLVM includes this location:
0x55 0x93 0x04 DW_OP_reg5 DW_OP_piece(4) When GCC's DWARF is simply
0x55 (DW_OP_reg5) without the DW_OP_piece. I believe it's reasonable
to assume the DWARF consumer knows which part of a register
logically holds the value (low bytes, high bytes, how many bytes,
etc) for a primitive value like an integer.
This patch gets rid of the redundant DW_OP_piece when a subregister is
at offset 0. It also adds previously missing subregister masking when
a subregister is followed by another operation.
(This reapplies r297960 with two additional testcase updates).
rdar://problem/31069390
https://reviews.llvm.org/D31010
llvm-svn: 297965
Citing http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32288
The DWARF generated by LLVM includes this location:
0x55 0x93 0x04 DW_OP_reg5 DW_OP_piece(4) When GCC's DWARF is simply
0x55 (DW_OP_reg5) without the DW_OP_piece. I believe it's reasonable
to assume the DWARF consumer knows which part of a register
logically holds the value (low bytes, high bytes, how many bytes,
etc) for a primitive value like an integer.
This patch gets rid of the redundant DW_OP_piece when a subregister is
at offset 0. It also adds previously missing subregister masking when
a subregister is followed by another operation.
rdar://problem/31069390
https://reviews.llvm.org/D31010
llvm-svn: 297960
When DwarfExpression is emitting a fragment that is located in a
register and that fragment is smaller than the register, and the
register must be composed from sub-registers (are you still with me?)
the last DW_OP_piece operation must not be larger than the size of the
fragment itself, since the last piece of the fragment could be smaller
than the last subregister that is being emitted.
rdar://problem/29779065
llvm-svn: 290324
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
LLVM's use of DW_OP_bit_piece is incorrect and a based on a
misunderstanding of the wording in the DWARF specification. The offset
argument of DW_OP_bit_piece refers to the offset into the location
that is on the top of the DWARF expression stack, and not an offset
into the source variable. This has since also been clarified in the
DWARF specification.
This patch fixes all uses of DW_OP_bit_piece to emit the correct
offset and simplifies the DwarfExpression class to semi-automaticaly
emit empty DW_OP_pieces to adjust the offset of the source variable,
thus simplifying the code using DwarfExpression.
While this is an incompatible bugfix, in practice I don't expect this
to be much of a problem since LLVM's old interpretation and the
correct interpretation of DW_OP_bit_piece differ only when there are
gaps in the fragmented locations of the described variables or if
individual fragments are smaller than a byte. LLDB at least won't
interpret locations with gaps in them because is has no way to present
undefined bits in a variable, and there is a high probability that an
old-form expression will be malformed when interpreted correctly,
because the DW_OP_bit_piece offset will be outside of the location at
the top of the stack.
As a nice side-effect, this patch enables us to use a more efficient
encoding for subregisters: In order to express a sub-register at a
non-zero offset we now use a DW_OP_bit_piece instead of shifting the
value into place manually.
This patch also adds missing test coverage for code paths that weren't
exercised before.
<rdar://problem/29335809>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27550
llvm-svn: 289266
so we can stop using DW_OP_bit_piece with the wrong semantics.
The entire back story can be found here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20161114/405934.html
The gist is that in LLVM we've been misinterpreting DW_OP_bit_piece's
offset field to mean the offset into the source variable rather than
the offset into the location at the top the DWARF expression stack. In
order to be able to fix this in a subsequent patch, this patch
introduces a dedicated DW_OP_LLVM_fragment operation with the
semantics that we used to apply to DW_OP_bit_piece, which is what we
actually need while inside of LLVM. This patch is complete with a
bitcode upgrade for expressions using the old format. It does not yet
fix the DWARF backend to use DW_OP_bit_piece correctly.
Implementation note: We discussed several options for implementing
this, including reserving a dedicated field in DIExpression for the
fragment size and offset, but using an custom operator at the end of
the expression works just fine and is more efficient because we then
only pay for it when we need it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27361
rdar://problem/29335809
llvm-svn: 288683
Adrian Prantl