[PATCH] D84120: [Debuginfo][SROA] (7/7) Support for DW_OP_implicit_pointer for named and unnamed variables (second strategy).

[David Blaikie via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

dblaikie added a comment.

In D84120#3373968 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84120#3373968>, @phosek wrote:

> This change was brought up in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/54290, @alok is this still active? Is there a way we can help to get this patch stack reviewed and landed?

Looks like there was some further discussion here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84112 and an alluded to llvm-dev thread that might be worth finding.

Also, I really wonder if it might be worth proposing a more flexible DWARF form/operator for this encoding. Currently the implicit_pointer only allows describing the pointer as pointing to another variable described by a variable DIE - I think it'd be nice to be able to avoid that indirection and creating synthetic variables to describe this in its full generality - and instead being able to describe the location (& maybe you need to point to a type too, but not a whole variable) directly in this variable location, maybe. It'd more closely model how I was leaning towards/pushing for this to be implemented in LLVM (LLVM_explicit_pointer was the prototype name) & I think makes more sense in general (in many cases you wouldn't be pointing to a known/named variable anyway - you could be pointing to a value in the calling frame that could be a composite itself, maybe several levels of indirection have been removed, etc)


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D84120/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D84120