DICompositeType will have an identifier field at position 14. For now, the
field is set to null in DIBuilder.
For DICompositeTypes where the template argument field (the 13th field)
was optional, modify DIBuilder to make sure the template argument field is set.
Now DICompositeType has 15 fields.
Update DIBuilder to use NULL instead of "i32 0" for null value of a MDNode.
Update verifier to check that DICompositeType has 15 fields and the last
field is null or a MDString.
Update testing cases to include an extra field for DICompositeType.
The identifier field will be used by type uniquing so a front end can
genearte a DICompositeType with a unique identifer.
llvm-svn: 189282
We used to call Verify before adding DICompileUnit to the list, and now we
remove the check and always add DICompileUnit to the list in DebugInfoFinder,
so we can verify them later on.
llvm-svn: 187237
Make sure the context and type fields are MDNodes. We will generate
verification errors if those fields are non-empty strings.
Fix testing cases to make them pass the verifier.
llvm-svn: 187106
This reverts commit r179840 with a fix to test/DebugInfo/two-cus-from-same-file.ll
I'm not sure why that test only failed on ARM & MIPS and not X86 Linux, even
though the debug info was clearly invalid on all of them, but this ought to fix
it.
llvm-svn: 179996
Adding another CU-wide list, in this case of imported_modules (since they
should be relatively rare, it seemed better to add a list where each element
had a "context" value, rather than add a (usually empty) list to every scope).
This takes care of DW_TAG_imported_module, but to fully address PR14606 we'll
need to expand this to cover DW_TAG_imported_declaration too.
llvm-svn: 179836
This reverts commit 342d92c7a0adeabc9ab00f3f0d88d739fe7da4c7.
Turns out we're going with a different schema design to represent
DW_TAG_imported_modules so we won't need this extra field.
llvm-svn: 178215
This is just the basic groundwork for supporting DW_TAG_imported_module but I
wanted to commit this before pushing support further into Clang or LLVM so that
this rather churny change is isolated from the rest of the work. The major
churn here is obviously adding another field (within the common DIScope prefix)
to all DIScopes (files, classes, namespaces, lexical scopes, etc). This should
be the last big churny change needed for DW_TAG_imported_module/using directive
support/PR14606.
llvm-svn: 178099
This is the first step to making all DIScopes have a common metadata prefix (so
that things (using directives, for example) that can appear in any scope can be
added to that common prefix). DIFile is itself a DIScope so the common prefix
of all DIScopes cannot be a DIFile - instead it's the raw filename/directory
name pair.
llvm-svn: 177239
This is the next step towards making the metadata for DIScopes have a common
prefix rather than having to delegate based on their tag type.
llvm-svn: 176913
These cases were found by further work to remove support for debug info
versioning. Common cleanups (other than changing the version info in the tag
field) included adding the last parameter to compile_units (recently added for
fission support) and other cases of trailing fields in lexical blocks, compile
units, and subprograms.
llvm-svn: 176834
Mostly this is just changing the named metadata (llvm.dbg.sp, llvm.dbg.gv,
llvm.dbg.<func>.lv, etc -> llvm.dbg.cu), adding a few fields to older records
(DIVariable: flags/inlined-at, DICompileUnit: sp/gv/types,
DISubprogram: local variables list)
The tests to update were discovered by a change I'm working on to remove debug
info version support - so any tests using old debug info versions I haven't
updated probably are bad tests or just not actually designed to test debug
info.
llvm-svn: 176671
The count attribute is more accurate with regards to the size of an array. It
also obviates the upper bound attribute in the subrange. We can also better
handle an unbound array by setting the count to -1 instead of the lower bound to
1 and upper bound to 0.
llvm-svn: 169312
The count field is necessary because there isn't a difference between the 'lo'
and 'hi' attributes for a one-element array and a zero-element array. When the
count is '0', we know that this is a zero-element array. When it's >=1, then
it's a normal constant sized array. When it's -1, then the array is unbounded.
llvm-svn: 169218
If lower bound is more then upper bound then consider it is an unbounded array.
An array is unbounded if non-zero lower bound is same as upper bound.
If lower bound and upper bound are zero than array has one element.
llvm-svn: 129156
Manman Ren