[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: CodeView debug info emission in Clang/LLVM

Reid Kleckner via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Mar 10 09:24:36 PST 2016


On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:26 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it'd be reasonable to at least figure out a good way to do type
> references consistently across the two schemes, but I'm OK with the idea of
> having a blob of opaque type information for different debug info formats,
> created by frontends (& don't mind if the library for building that blob
> live in LLVM or Clang for now - the DWARF one at least would probably live
> in LLVM because type info and other DWARF are described by similar/the same
> constructs (DIEs, abbrevs, etc) - but it seems like that's not the case for
> PDB, so there might not be any code to share between LLVM's CodeView needs
> and the type info construction - then it's just a matter of whether pushing
> that library down into LLVM for other frontends to use would be good, which
> it probably will be at some point, so if it goes into Clang I'd at least
> try to keep it pretty well separated)
>
> Potentially that consistency could be created by going the other way -
> replace DITypeRef with an int, then have the retained types list be the
> int->type mapping. Skipping the mangled names. (& skip the retained types
> list for CV/PDB)
>

DITypeRef wraps a Metadata*, though, not an int. Given that there are zero
users of DITypeRef in Transforms/ and Analysis/, I don't see why we should
try to forcibly create sharing where there is none. The only consumers of
type information are essentially the separate debug info backends.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160310/8e5d419d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list