[PATCH] D105907: [CallGraphSection] Add call graph section options and documentation

[Matt Morehouse via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

morehouse added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:58
+
+A type identifier may be repeated in different entries. The id value 0 is
+reserved for unknown and used for indirect targets with unknown type.
----------------
Why would a type ID be repeated?


================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:61
+
+As of now, only supported format version is described above and has version
+number 0.
----------------



================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:69
+The mapping from a type to an identifier is an ABI detail.
+In the current experimental implementation, the identifier of type T is
+computed as follows:
----------------



================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:148
+  "foo", "int (char, void*)", "_ZTSFicPvE.generalized", "e3804d2a7f2b03fe"
+  "main", "int ()", "_ZTSFiE.generalized", "fa6809609a76afca"
+
----------------
Why quotes around these table headers/entries?


================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:160
+Notice that the current implementation may have seperate entries with the same
+type id as above.
+
----------------
Why is this?


================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:174
+    fa6809609a76afca 401130
+    e3804d2a7f2b03fe 401110
+
----------------
Do we need to list functions that don't match any callsites (e.g., `main`)?


================
Comment at: clang/docs/CallGraphSection.rst:183
+    401130 40115b
+    401170 4011b5
+
----------------
So this section is useful for constructing the call graph, but we don't really need it for stack trace reconstruction, right?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D105907/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D105907