[LLVMdev] Proposal: type uniquing of debug info for LTO

[Manman Ren]

On Jun 21, 2013, at 4:41 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

>> The reason I want a flag is to avoid the need to update the existing testing
>> cases while this is a work in progress.
>> I believe migrating one field means updating the existing testing cases?
> 
> It would, yes - and that's how you'd get coverage to know your change
> was stable. You'll have to update all the tests eventually anyway &
> doing so incrementally isn't substantially more expensive in my
> experience. Perhaps there's something unique to this migration that
> would make it so?

I am going to update the existing testing cases locally to have the test coverage, but I don't want to check in the changes often.
Once we turn the flag on by default and remove the other path, I will submit the changes on the testing cases.

Another point to have a flag is to check in the patches in steps: DIBuilder changes, changes related to the map, and DwarfDebug changes.
Without the flag, when I migrate the first field, I have to make sure it works from frontend all the way to the backend.

Hopefully that makes sense.

Thanks for all your help,
Manman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130621/9658504b/attachment.html>