[llvm-dev] [SelectionDAG] DbgValue nodes aren't transferred

[Se Jong Oh via llvm-dev]

Thanks for help! I think that sign extension is not involved here. PromoteIntegerResult is called since i32 is not a legal type in my target and the legalizer promotes operations with i32 result type to i64 operations. I think that SetPromotedInteger seems to be a common place for all promotions like SetExpandedInteger.

Jonas, I would appreciate it if you can guide me about whether my understanding is correct or not.

Thanks,
Sejong



From: vsk at apple.com <vsk at apple.com>
Sent: Friday, March 9, 2018 3:19 PM
To: Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com>
Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Jonas Devlieghere <jdevlieghere at apple.com>; Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com>; pidgeot18 at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [SelectionDAG] DbgValue nodes aren't transferred

+ Adrian, Joshua
+ Jonas, since he contributed the transferDbgValues change in DAGTypeLegalizer::SetExpandedInteger

On Mar 8, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Se Jong Oh via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

Hi,

I have a problem that dbg_value nodes are not transferred when integer DAG nodes are promoted. For example, an i32 add node is promoted to a i64 add node by DAGTypeLegalizer::PromoteIntegerResult and its dbg_value node is not transferred to the new node.

t9: i32 = add nsw t5, t8 -->  t31: i64 = add t30, t7   ; the dbg_value node is not transferred to the new i64 add node.

For expansion, DAGTypeLegalizer::SetExpandedInteger calls transferDbgValues() but I couldn’t find any place to call trasnferDbgValues() for integer type promotion in DAGTypeLegalizer ::SetPromotedInteger and other places.

Maybe the right place to do this is within the PromoteIntRes_ helper for sign extensions?

best,
vedant


I am wondering If I miss anything or the legalization needs to call transferDbgValues() for this case.

I found this problem because a recently added unittest, DebugInfo/X86/linear-dbg-value.ll fails for my project, and the x86 and aarch64 backends don’t have this problem since they don’t promote i32 add nodes.

Thanks,
Sejong

_______________________________________________
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<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.llvm.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fllvm-dev&data=04%7C01%7Csejooh%40microsoft.com%7Cf8d9536de7c74f3a20ce08d586141eb2%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636562343324953221%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ%3D%3D%7C-2&sdata=S9HQs6h1fxCU2LhD0zPjI%2BO4BBSVgTnn6a8Cz9ji7iA%3D&reserved=0>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180313/24d8d102/attachment.html>