On Mon, 28 Jul 2014, Herman, Andrei wrote:
> Please find attached the fixed patch files for this change:
> 1. Add command line option -fforce-dwarf-lexical-blocks.
> 2. Support flag_force_dwarf_blocks in C.
The front-end parts of these patches are OK with the changes indicated
below
Please find attached the fixed patch files for this change:
1. Add command line option -fforce-dwarf-lexical-blocks.
2. Support flag_force_dwarf_blocks in C.
3. Support flag_force_dwarf_blocks in C++.
Attached also are the proposed ChangeLog additions, named according to
I will be on vacation until July 13.
I'll have access to my e-mail occasionally.
If you could send me please your comments, both style and content,
pertaining to all three patches related to this subject, I will make all
the needed changes and I could submit a new version, as soon as I get back
On Sun, 1 Jun 2014, Herman, Andrei wrote:
>+ /* The -fforce-dwarf-lexical-blocks option is only relevant when debug
>+ info is in DWARF4 format */
>+ if (flag_force_dwarf_blocks) {
Watch coding style: the opening '{' always goes on the next line.
>+fforce-dwarf-lexical-blocks
>+C C++ Var(f
Hi,
Currently GCC only emits DWARF debug information (DW_TAG_lexical_block
DIEs) for compound statements containing significant local declarations.
However, code coverage tools that process the DWARF debug information to
implement block/path coverage need more complete lexical block information
On Thu, 8 May 2014, Herman, Andrei wrote:
> > > Declarations that would fall into the scope of a newly created label
> > > scope are moved into the enclosing "normal" (non label) scope, where
> > they actually belong.
> >
> > Shouldn't you be able to do something like that for the other cases as
> -Original Message-
> From: Joseph Myers [mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 8:27 PM
> To: Herman, Andrei
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command line
> option
>
&g
On Thu, 8 May 2014, Herman, Andrei wrote:
> The changes in gcc/c/c-decl.c are meant to deal with this problem.
> Declarations
> that would fall into the scope of a newly created label scope are moved into
> the
> enclosing "normal" (non label) scope, where they actually belong.
Shouldn't you
> -Original Message-
> From: Joseph Myers [mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 9:01 PM
> To: Herman, Andrei
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; herman_and...@mentor.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command
On May 7, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Herman, Andrei
wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion.
> I can add the suggested sentence at the beginning of the description, to save
> time for users not interested in the more detailed explanation.
I’d put it at the end… I think the description you have it more imp
On Wed, 7 May 2014, Herman, Andrei wrote:
> When this flag is set, a DW_TAG_lexical_block DIE will be emitted for every
> function body, loop body, switch body, case statement, if-then and if-else
> statement, even if the body is a single statement.
> Likewise, a lexical block will be emitted for
]
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 7:00 PM
>> To: Herman, Andrei
>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; herman_and...@mentor.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command line
>> option
>>
>> On May 7, 2014, at 2:32 AM, Herman, And
Stump [mailto:mikest...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 7:00 PM
> To: Herman, Andrei
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; herman_and...@mentor.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command line
> option
>
> On May 7, 2014, at 2:32 AM, Herma
On May 7, 2014, at 2:32 AM, Herman, Andrei
wrote:
> However, code coverage tools that process the DWARF debug information to
> implement block/path coverage need more complete lexical block information.
So, it would be nice to give a hint in the actual documentation, why a user
might use the f
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; herman_and...@mentor.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command line
> option
>
>
>
> > On May 7, 2014, at 2:32 AM, "Herman, Andrei"
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> &g
> On May 7, 2014, at 2:32 AM, "Herman, Andrei"
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Currently GCC only emits DWARF debug information (DW_TAG_lexical_block DIEs)
> for compound statements containing significant local declarations.
> However, code coverage tools that process the DWARF debug information to
>
Hi,
Currently GCC only emits DWARF debug information (DW_TAG_lexical_block DIEs)
for compound statements containing significant local declarations.
However, code coverage tools that process the DWARF debug information to
implement block/path coverage need more complete lexical block information.
17 matches
Mail list logo
