[llvm-dev] Prefixing DEBUG messages with DEBUG_TYPE (was re: [PATCH] D13259: LLE 6/6: Add LoopLoadElimination pass)

[Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev]

Moving this discussion here from the review thread.

RIght now, we have a few passes that prefix DEBUG message with various
things, so folks using -debug can tell where the debug message came from.

But this is not consistent, and in fact, most passes don't do it.

Worse, the prefixes used do not often match the DEBUG_TYPE of the pass.

It would be nice to fix this, and just have the DEBUG macros output the
debug type in front of messages if that's what folks want.

Of course, it turns out you can't just make the DEBUG macro do something
here, because people use it for more than just outputting messages.

My thought was to just bite the bullet and make a DEBUG_MSG macro that
outputs the DEBUG_TYPE, and replace the appropriate existing uses of
DEBUG(dbgs() <<) with it.

Something like
#define DEBUG_MSG_WITH_TYPE(t, x) DEBUG_WITH_TYPE(t, dbgs() << t <<":" <<
x;)
#define DEBUG_MSG(x) DEBUG_MSG_WITH_TYPE(DEBUG_TYPE, x)

Suggestions, however, welcome!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
Date: Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] D13259: LLE 6/6: Add LoopLoadElimination pass
To: anemet at apple.com, hfinkel at anl.gov, dberlin at dberlin.org
Cc: mssimpso at codeaurora.org, sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com,
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org


rengolin added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13259#278362, @dberlin wrote:

> I would suggest rather than prefix *anything*, anywhere, that if we want
>  prefixes, we just have the DEBUG macro output the debug type in front of
>  the message ;-)


Sounds good to me.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D13259
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151102/4435155b/attachment-0001.html>