[llvm-dev] Question about LLVM Building Error with "-DLLVM_ENABLE_DUMP" and "RelWithDebInfo"

[Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev]

> On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:17 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote:
> 
> Presently several of our headers have definitions like:
> 
> #if !defined(NDEBUG) || defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)
>   void dump() const;
> #endif
> 
> Would it make sense to modify the build system to define LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP in config.h on debug builds?
> 
> Then we could wrap dump methods just based on LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP instead of two variables.

I missed this email earlier, but that totally makes sense to me (ideally with a link/runtime check like the ABI_BREAKING_CHECK one).

Thanks,

— 
Mehdi


>> On Apr 10, 2017, at 1:34 PM, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>] On Behalf Of Mehdi
>>> Amini via llvm-dev
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 2:26 PM
>>> To: Matthias Braun
>>> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; jingu at codeplay.com <mailto:jingu at codeplay.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Question about LLVM Building Error with "-
>>> DLLVM_ENABLE_DUMP" and "RelWithDebInfo"
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:45 PM, Matthias Braun via llvm-dev <llvm-
>>> dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I think the idea is to keep NDEBUG out of headers when possible. So I
>>> think this should better be something like:
>>>> 
>>>> -#ifndef NDEBUG
>>>>  void dumpUses(unsigned RegNo) const;
>>>> -#endif
>>>> 
>>>> to be inline with various other dumpers (like MachineInstr::dump(),
>>> Pass::dump(), …)
>>> 
>>> I’m fine with leaving methods there, but we need to be able to compile-out
>>> fields in structure.
>> 
>> Hmmm seems to me this has come up in the past, and somebody pointed out
>> that it prevents building a debug-mode front-end against a release-mode LLVM.
>> (Why is that a valid use-case?  If I have an out-of-tree front end, and
>> especially one with a different license, I might well prefer to download
>> only LLVM releases rather than keep up-to-date with a live tree that I
>> build myself.  IIRC we do not provide debug-mode downloads, therefore 
>> anything that affects struct size/layout will break this use-case.)
>> --paulr
>> 
>>> 
>>> We already have ABI_BREAKING_CHECKS for instance to this end, the naming
>>> isn’t completely in line with LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP but could be unified.
>>> 
>>> —
>>> Mehdi
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If that works for you please submit a patch to phabricator as described
>>> in http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#making-and-submitting-a-patch <http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#making-and-submitting-a-patch>
>>>> 
>>>> - Matthias
>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 6, 2017, at 7:38 AM, jingu at codeplay.com <mailto:jingu at codeplay.com> via llvm-dev <llvm-
>>> dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have tried to build llvm tip as following:
>>>>> 
>>>>> cmake -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS:STRING="-DLLVM_ENABLE_DUMP" -
>>> DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo ../llvm
>>>>> 
>>>>> After running 'make', I have got error messages like below.
>>>>> 
>>>>> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineRegisterInfo.cpp:462:67: error: no ‘void
>>> llvm::MachineRegisterInfo::dumpUses(unsigned int) const’ member function
>>> declared in class ‘llvm::MachineRegisterInfo’
>>>>> 
>>>>> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp:2331:57: error: no ‘void
>>> llvm::SchedBoundary::dumpScheduledState()’ member function declared in
>>> class ‘llvm::SchedBoundary’
>>>>> 
>>>>> ...
>>>>> 
>>>>> It seems the "defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)" is needed on several
>>> locations. How do you think about it? I have attached the diff file about
>>> the locations for reference.  If I missed something, please let me know.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> JinGu Kang
>>>>> 
>>>>> <dump.diff>_______________________________________________
>>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170410/8952d9e1/attachment.html>