[llvm-dev] [yaml2obj] GSoC-20: Add DWARF support to yaml2obj
David Blaikie via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Mar 31 11:06:47 PDT 2020
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:01 AM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2020, at 10:55 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 to all that & cc'ing a few of the usual suspects as FYI
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 10:36 AM Pavel Labath via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> For me personally, the ability to write/edit syntactically correct dwarf
>> easily is much more important than being able to generate "incorrect"
>> dwarf -- I'm perfectly happy to continue to write the latter in
>> assembly, but there is a lot that could be improved about the experience
>> of writing "correct" dwarf. Ideally, I'd have a mode where I can just
> Do we think that yaml2obj is the best format for this, or would high-level
> DWARF DIE *assembler directives *be a more useful abstraction level? If
> you think about the .loc directive, there is actually some prior art in
.loc is necessary because it depends on encoding bit lengths of intervening
instructions, etc. Otherwise the line table would be like other DWARF
sections and not involve assembler-awareness.
I don't think it'd be a great idea to add the complexities of DWARF
emission to the assembler (except where it's fundamentally necessary, like
debug_line/.loc) - it'd be a lot of surface area to expose to users of
LLVM, support in the future as DWARF standards change, etc.
> -- adrian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev