| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This adds a visitLocationList function to the DWARF v4 location lists,
similar to what already exists for DWARF v5. It follows the approach
outlined in previous patches (D69672), where the parsed form is always
stored in the DWARF v5 format, which makes it easier for generic code to
be built on top of that. v4 location lists are "upgraded" during
parsing, and then this upgrade is undone while dumping.
Both "inline" and section-based dumping is rewritten to reuse the
existing "generic" location list dumper. This means that the output
format is consistent for all location lists (the only thing one needs to
implement is the function which prints the "raw" form of a location
list), and that debug_loc dumping correctly processes base address
selection entries, etc.
The previous existing debug_loc functionality (e.g.,
parseOneLocationList) is rewritten on top of the new API, but it is not
removed as there is still code which uses them. This will be done in
follow-up patches, after I build the API to access the "interpreted"
location lists in a generic way (as that is what those users really
want).
Reviewers: dblaikie, probinson, JDevlieghere, aprantl, SouraVX
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69847
|
|
|
Summary:
The positions of the DwarfVersion and AddressSize arguments were
reversed, which caused parsing for dwarf opcodes which contained
address-size-dependent operands (such as DW_OP_addr). Amusingly enough,
none of the address-size asserts fired, as dwarf version was always 4,
which is a valid address size.
I ran into this when constructing weird inputs for the DWARF verifier. I
I add a test case as hand-written dwarf -- I am not sure how to trigger
this differently, as having a DW_OP_addr inside a location list is a
fairly non-standard thing to do.
Fixing this error exposed a bug in the debug_loc.dwo parser, which was
always being constructed with an address size of 0. I fix that as well
by following the pattern in the non-dwo parser of picking up the address
size from the first compile unit (which is technically not correct, but
probably good enough in practice).
Reviewers: JDevlieghere, aprantl, dblaikie
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45324
llvm-svn: 329381
|
