CarlosAlbertoEnciso added a comment.
Hi @sdesmalen!
For the following test case
int main() {
int size = 2;
int var[size];
var[1] = 1;
return 0;
}
I compared the DWARF generated by GCC and it looks like
DW_TAG_variable "var"
DW_AT_location ...
DW_AT_type DW_FORM_ref4
DW_TAG_array_type
DW_AT_type -> "int"
DW_TAG_subrange_type
DW_AT_type -> "sizetype"
DW_AT_upper_bound DW_FORM_exprloc [4] = { DW_OP_fbreg 0xffffffb8
DW_OP_deref }
GCC use DW_AT_upper_bound with an associated location expression to describe
the VLA boundaries.
In order to reduce the side effects created by the artifical-variable as
described in my previous comment and to keep the generated DWARF within a
reasonable size, I would suggest the GCC aproach as a size optimization.
The DWARF description of the artificial-variable could be removed and its
location expression used by the array's subrange_type, instead of the
subrange_type making a reference to the artificial-variable.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41698
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
