[llvm-dev] [lldb-dev] Adding DWARF5 accelerator table support to llvm
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jun 15 11:59:29 PDT 2018
gc> Solution #1 would cause us to dig through all definitions of all C++
gc> classes all the time when parsing DWARF to check if definitions of
gc> the classes had template methods. And we would need to find the class
gc> that has the most template methods. This would cause us to parse much
gc> more of the debug info all of the time and cause increased memory
gc> consumption and performance regressions.
pr> It would be cheap to put a flag on the class DIE that tells you there
pr> are template methods to go look for. Then you incur the cost only
pr> when necessary. And the accelerator table makes it fast to find the
pr> other class descriptions.
gc> That is a fine solution. But we still run into the problem where we don't
gc> know if the DWARF knows about that flag. If we do a flag, it would be nice
gc> if it were mandatory on all classes to indicate support for the flag. But
gc> this would be a fine solution and not hard to implement.
pr> So what you really want is not a flag, but a count, so you can tell when
pr> you've found all the different templates. If the count is zero, there's
pr> nothing to look for. If the count is two, you look around at all the
pr> various definitions of the class until you find two different templates,
pr> then you stop. If there's no count attribute, your producer doesn't
pr> know you want this information and you do it the hard way. Or, we've
pr> invented a way to describe the templates directly in the class.
pr> How's that?
gc> that would work fine.
I filed PR37816 to track this idea.
The other ideas:
- accelerator to point to the actual instantiations
- emitting template definitions not just instantiations
would be trickier to define and harder to implement correctly.
I won't say they can't be done, but somebody else would have to do
the heavy lifting here, unless it turns out that our debugger folks
like the idea.
More information about the llvm-dev