[llvm] r335897 - [Debugify] Do not report line 0 locations as errors

[via llvm-commits]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: vsk at apple.com [mailto:vsk at apple.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 12:17 PM
> To: Robinson, Paul
> Cc: llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: [llvm] r335897 - [Debugify] Do not report line 0 locations as
> errors
> 
> 
> 
> > On Jul 2, 2018, at 8:25 AM, paul.robinson at sony.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: llvm-commits [mailto:llvm-commits-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On
> Behalf
> >> Of Vedant Kumar via llvm-commits
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 2:21 PM
> >> To: llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
> >> Subject: [llvm] r335897 - [Debugify] Do not report line 0 locations as
> >> errors
> >>
> >> Author: vedantk
> >> Date: Thu Jun 28 11:21:11 2018
> >> New Revision: 335897
> >>
> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=335897&view=rev
> >> Log:
> >> [Debugify] Do not report line 0 locations as errors
> >>
> >> The checking logic should not treat artificial locations as being
> >> somehow problematic. Producing these locations can be the desired
> >> behavior of some passes.
> >>
> >> See llvm.org/PR37961.
> >>
> >> Added:
> >>    llvm/trunk/test/DebugInfo/debugify-report-missing-locs-only.ll
> >> Modified:
> >>    llvm/trunk/tools/opt/Debugify.cpp
> >>
> >> Added: llvm/trunk/test/DebugInfo/debugify-report-missing-locs-only.ll
> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-
> >> project/llvm/trunk/test/DebugInfo/debugify-report-missing-locs-
> >> only.ll?rev=335897&view=auto
> >>
> ==========================================================================
> >> ====
> >> --- llvm/trunk/test/DebugInfo/debugify-report-missing-locs-only.ll
> (added)
> >> +++ llvm/trunk/test/DebugInfo/debugify-report-missing-locs-only.ll Thu
> Jun
> >> 28 11:21:11 2018
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> >> +; RUN: opt -check-debugify < %s -S -o - 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
> >> +
> >> +; CHECK: ERROR: Instruction with empty DebugLoc in function foo --
> ret
> >> void
> >> +define void @foo() !dbg !6 {
> >> +  ret void
> >> +}
> >> +
> >
> > Please put a CHECK-LABEL before the CHECK-NOT so we can be sure the two
> > checks are looking at the correct functions.
> 
> Each check contains the function name it's checking for explicitly. Is
> that insufficient? If so, what label would we check for, given that
> diagnostics and IR are printed to different files?

Ah, sorry, missed that the diagnostics are on stderr.
But when I see CHECK followed by CHECK-NOT, I always get worried about 
things being reordered, and then a CHECK-NOT doesn't look at all the 
output you want it to look at, and so gives you a false pass.

Two common ways to address that are to repeat the CHECK-NOT on both
sides of the CHECK, or use `--implicit-check-not` in the FileCheck call.
--paulr

> 
> thanks,
> vedant
> 
> 
> > Thanks,
> > --paulr
> >
> >> +; CHECK-NOT: ERROR: Instruction with empty DebugLoc in function bar
> >> +define i32 @bar() !dbg !9 {
> >> +  ret i32 0, !dbg !15
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +declare void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata, metadata, metadata)
> >> +
> >> +!llvm.dbg.cu = !{!0}
> >> +!llvm.debugify = !{!3, !4}
> >> +!llvm.module.flags = !{!5}
> >> +
> >> +!0 = distinct !DICompileUnit(language: DW_LANG_C, file: !1, producer:
> >> "debugify", isOptimized: true, runtimeVersion: 0, emissionKind:
> FullDebug,
> >> enums: !2)
> >> +!1 = !DIFile(filename: "void", directory: "/")
> >> +!2 = !{}
> >> +!3 = !{i32 6}
> >> +!4 = !{i32 1}
> >> +!5 = !{i32 2, !"Debug Info Version", i32 3}
> >> +!6 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "foo", linkageName: "foo", scope:
> null,
> >> file: !1, line: 1, type: !7, isLocal: false, isDefinition: true,
> >> scopeLine: 1, isOptimized: true, unit: !0, retainedNodes: !2)
> >> +!7 = !DISubroutineType(types: !2)
> >> +!9 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "bar", linkageName: "bar", scope:
> null,
> >> file: !1, line: 2, type: !7, isLocal: false, isDefinition: true,
> >> scopeLine: 2, isOptimized: true, unit: !0, retainedNodes: !10)
> >> +!10 = !{!11}
> >> +!11 = !DILocalVariable(name: "1", scope: !9, file: !1, line: 3, type:
> >> !12)
> >> +!12 = !DIBasicType(name: "ty32", size: 32, encoding: DW_ATE_unsigned)
> >> +!15 = !DILocation(line: 0, column: 1, scope: !9)
> >>
> >> Modified: llvm/trunk/tools/opt/Debugify.cpp
> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-
> >>
> project/llvm/trunk/tools/opt/Debugify.cpp?rev=335897&r1=335896&r2=335897&v
> >> iew=diff
> >>
> ==========================================================================
> >> ====
> >> --- llvm/trunk/tools/opt/Debugify.cpp (original)
> >> +++ llvm/trunk/tools/opt/Debugify.cpp Thu Jun 28 11:21:11 2018
> >> @@ -237,11 +237,13 @@ bool checkDebugifyMetadata(Module &M,
> >>         continue;
> >>       }
> >>
> >> -      dbg() << "ERROR: Instruction with empty DebugLoc in function ";
> >> -      dbg() << F.getName() << " --";
> >> -      I.print(dbg());
> >> -      dbg() << "\n";
> >> -      HasErrors = true;
> >> +      if (!DL) {
> >> +        dbg() << "ERROR: Instruction with empty DebugLoc in function
> ";
> >> +        dbg() << F.getName() << " --";
> >> +        I.print(dbg());
> >> +        dbg() << "\n";
> >> +        HasErrors = true;
> >> +      }
> >>     }
> >>
> >>     // Find missing variables and mis-sized debug values.
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> llvm-commits mailing list
> >> llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
> >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits