[llvm-dev] [Debuginfo] Changing llvm.dbg.value and DBG_VALUE to support multiple location operands

[Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev]

> On Oct 8, 2020, at 4:07 AM, Tozer, Stephen <stephen.tozer at sony.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > So I wonder if we should instead model this only at the MIR level, where this distinction actually makes sense. In MIR, we probably don't want to rewrite every DIExpression, so it would make sense to model it either as a flag on the intrinsic, or by have two kinds of intrinsics.
> 
> That works for me - as long as we have the ability to represent these expressions, it should be fine. What will be slightly awkward is maintaining this at the same time as the old DBG_VALUE; having two flags on two different but related instructions with the same name and meanings that are almost the same but slightly different. Still, the old version will be deprecated so we shouldn't have to worry too much.

My expectation is that DBG_VALUE_OLD is not going to stick around with us for very long. It's only used internally in LLVM and we should be able to move off it quickly. That the short transitional period may be confusing doesn't bother me.

Great — that sounds like a plan then!

thanks for your patience working through this,
adrian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201008/f17160c1/attachment.html>