On Nov 13, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Bill Wendling <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Nov 13, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Eric Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >>> >> I talked with Greg and he said that accel tables wouldn't work with LTO. They need to eventually work, but I don't need them to be correct yet since I will recalculate them when dsymutil is run (I ignore the compiler output and regenerate my own tables in dsymutil). >> The problem is triggered even with `-gline-tables-only'. I don't have a >> small testcase, but you need to build LLVM with LTO and `-gline-tables-only' >> then run dwarfdump on it like I said. >> >> >> That's curious, did he give a reason? > > I think it had to do with messed up debug info. Greg, could you explain a bit > more? We don't need them for now. We will require a dSYM for LTO for a while until we can update LLDB to handle linking LTO dwarf in .o files. > >> You can have an accelerator table for a final executable. That said the >> accelerator tables make not sense for -gline-tables-only which could be >> causing you the problems you're see since there's very little info for the >> tables to work with and there could be issues there. There should be a DIE >> for each entry in the names table. What do, for example, those offsets give >> you? >> > The offsets are bogus. I can't find them in the dwarfdump. > >>> Do you have a particular set of output from the verify to show what's going >>> on here? >>> >> These are the first several lines of the verify output. It's big. >> >> Not surprising as it's pretty heinous debug info at this point. So, what are >> the DIE offsets for those functions? llvm-dwarfdump doesn't dump them at the >> moment so you'll need to use dwarfdump to look for the functions. >> > I'll take a look after lunch. I might be able to reduce a testcase to look > at... > > -bw > > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
