[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added a comment. In D80391#2497073 , @MaskRay wrote: > From @dblaikie's email reply: > >> ^ this I would consider to be a bug. -g should be needed to generate debug >> info into the IR, and -gsplit-dwarf should be needed to choose how debug >> i

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. From @dblaikie's email reply: > ^ this I would consider to be a bug. -g should be needed to generate debug > info into the IR, and -gsplit-dwarf should be needed to choose how debug info > already in the IR should be placed into object files or dwo files. > > Usually (n

Re: [PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 6:26 PM Fangrui Song via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > MaskRay added a comment. > > In D80391#2497018 , @inglorion > wrote: > > > For Chrome on Chrome OS, this is https://crbug.com/1158215 > > > > Here, we saw our

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. In D80391#2497018 , @inglorion wrote: > For Chrome on Chrome OS, this is https://crbug.com/1158215 > > Here, we saw our links fail with "output file too large". Investigation > revealed that debug info was being included in the bi

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added a comment. In D80391#2497018 , @inglorion wrote: > For Chrome on Chrome OS, this is https://crbug.com/1158215 > > Here, we saw our links fail with "output file too large". Investigation > revealed that debug info was being included in the b

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

inglorion added a comment. For Chrome on Chrome OS, this is https://crbug.com/1158215 Here, we saw our links fail with "output file too large". Investigation revealed that debug info was being included in the binary, instead of in .dwo files as expected. That turned out to be caused by this cha

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added inline comments. Comment at: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:120 `nonnull` attribute on `this` for configurations that need it to be nullable. +- ``-gsplit-dwarf`` no longer implies ``-g2``. MaskRay wrote: > dblaikie wrote: > > thakis wrote: > > >

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added inline comments. Comment at: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:120 `nonnull` attribute on `this` for configurations that need it to be nullable. +- ``-gsplit-dwarf`` no longer implies ``-g2``. dblaikie wrote: > thakis wrote: > > This apparently bit u

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added inline comments. Comment at: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:120 `nonnull` attribute on `this` for configurations that need it to be nullable. +- ``-gsplit-dwarf`` no longer implies ``-g2``. thakis wrote: > This apparently bit us (chromium) in thi

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. In D80391#2496583 , @thakis wrote: > Do we emit a warning if we see `-gsplit-dwarf` alone? Should we? `{gcc,clang} -gcolumn-info -c a.c` does not warn about unused -gcolumn-info. Not having a warning makes such toggle flags more

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

thakis added inline comments. Comment at: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:120 `nonnull` attribute on `this` for configurations that need it to be nullable. +- ``-gsplit-dwarf`` no longer implies ``-g2``. This apparently bit us (chromium) in thinlto configs. Coul

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

thakis added a comment. Do we emit a warning if we see `-gsplit-dwarf` alone? Should we? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391 ___ cfe-commits mailing l

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG843f2dbf003f: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2 (authored by MaskRay). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. I have also notified ChromeOS/Android NDK/Bazel maintainers since they use -gsplit-dwarf (though might not be affected). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391 ___

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. In D80391#2438447 , @MaskRay wrote: > In D80391#2437926 , @dblaikie wrote: > >> Looks like GCC has changed the semantics here despite the backwards >> compatibility break - as much as I'd r

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay updated this revision to Diff 310073. MaskRay edited the summary of this revision. MaskRay added a comment. Comment Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391 Files: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.r

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:3718 + } else +DwarfFission = DwarfFissionKind::None; MaskRay wrote: > dblaikie wrote: > > Rather than undoing the DwarfFission uinitialization, instead could the > > DwarfF

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:3718 + } else +DwarfFission = DwarfFissionKind::None; dblaikie wrote: > Rather than undoing the DwarfFission uinitialization, instead could the > DwarfFission initialization

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added a comment. In D80391#2438447 , @MaskRay wrote: > In D80391#2437926 , @dblaikie wrote: > >> Looks like GCC has changed the semantics here despite the backwards >> compatibility break - as much as I'd

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. In D80391#2437926 , @dblaikie wrote: > Looks like GCC has changed the semantics here despite the backwards > compatibility break - as much as I'd rather not break backwards compatibility > it's probably best on balance to maintai

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie accepted this revision. dblaikie added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Looks like GCC has changed the semantics here despite the backwards compatibility break - as much as I'd rather not break backwards compatibility it's probably best on balance to maintain

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added a comment. In D80391#2179182 , @MaskRay wrote: > Ping... Was hoping to get some more discussion on the general debug flag naming thread on the GCC list, but that hasn't happened - so I've replied/poked it a bit: https://gcc.gnu.org/piperm

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. Ping... Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cg

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay added a comment. Received Cary's response and I am authorized to share this > In retrospect, I regret not naming the option -fsplit-dwarf, which clearly > would not have implied -g, and would have fit in with a few other > dwarf-related -f options. (I don't know whether Richard's object

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

dblaikie added a comment. I think it's probably best to keep this subject on the cfe-dev thread until there's agreement there. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80391

[PATCH] D80391: [Driver] Don't make -gsplit-dwarf imply -g2

MaskRay created this revision. MaskRay added reviewers: aprantl, dblaikie, echristo, JDevlieghere, jhenderson, probinson, thakis. Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. RFC: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-May/065430.html Agreement from GCC: https://s