> On Mar 17, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Greg Clayton <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 17, 2015, at 9:46 AM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Greg Clayton <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mar 16, 2015, at 6:47 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Adrian Prantl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the explanation David, I missed that it is entirely the linker's 
>>> (or some dwarf post-processor's) responsibility to find the module files 
>>> and link in the debug info from the .pcm files, so debugger doesn’t notice 
>>> a difference.
>>> 
>>> I think there's still some confusion here. Sorry if I'm rehashing 
>>> something, but I'll try to explain how this all works.
>>> 
>>> Normal split DWARF:
>>> 
>>> Compiler generates two files: .o and .dwo.
>>> .dwo has static, non-relocatable debug info.
>>> .o has a skeleton compile_unit that has the name of the .dwo file and a 
>>> hash to verify that the .dwo file isn't stale when the debugger reads it.
>>> The .o files are all linked together, the .dwo files stay where they are.
>>> The debugger reads the linked executable, finds the skeleton compile_units 
>>> contained therein, and find/loads the .dwo files
>>> 
>>> The scenario I have in mind for module debug info is this:
>>> Module is compiled as an object file with debug info (this file is actually 
>>> a .dwo file, even if it has some other extension - it has the 
>>> non-relocatable debug info in it)
>>> .o file has a comdat'd skeleton compile_unit describing the .dwo/module file
>>> <from here on no extra work is required, the linker and debugger just act 
>>> as normal>
>>> The .o files are linked together, the skeleton compile_units get 
>>> deduplicated by the linker (comdat sections)
>> 
>> One issue I can think of is we will need to figure out a way to make COMDAT 
>> work with mach-o. COMDAT requires large number of sections and mach-o can 
>> only have 255.
>> 
>> Ah, fair enough - how does MachO handle inline functions (the most common 
>> use of comdat) currently, then?
> 
> Currently mach-o relies on symbols in the symbol table being marked as weak 
> and I believe the data for these symbols are in special sections that are 
> marked as containing items that can be coalesced.
> 
That’s not necessarily an issue that needs to be solved on Darwin, or am I 
maybe missing something? The linker leaves all debug info in the .o (as it 
currently does) and llvm-dsymutil is resolving all the external module type 
references while creating the .dSYM bundle.

-- adrian
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to