[llvm][DebugInfo] Add DW_AT_type to DW_TAG_enumeration_type in non-strict DWARF v2 mode #98335
+37
−21
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…rict DWARF v2 mode During testing of llvm#96202 we found that when clang set to DWARF v2 was used to build the test file, lldb could not tell that the unsigned enum type was in fact unsigned. So it defaulted to signed and printed the wrong value. The reason for this is that DWARFv2 does not include DW_AT_type in DW_TAG_enumeration_type. This was added in DWARF v3: "The enumeration type entry may also have a DW_AT_type attribute which refers to the underlying data type used to implement the enumeration. In C or C++, the underlying type will be the appropriate integral type determined by the compiler from the properties of the enumeration literal values." I noticed that gcc does emit this attribute for DWARF v2 but not when strict DWARF is requested (more details in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063#c7). This patch changes to clang to do the same. This will improve the experience of anyone using tools that can understand the attribute but for whatever reason are stuck building binaries containing v2 only. You can see a current clang/gcc comparison here: https://godbolt.org/z/eG9Kc9WGf https://reviews.llvm.org/D42734 added the original code that emitted this for >= v3 only.
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-debuginfo Author: David Spickett (DavidSpickett) ChangesDuring testing of #96202 we found that when clang set to DWARF v2 was used to build the test file, lldb could not tell that the unsigned enum type was in fact unsigned. So it defaulted to signed and printed the wrong value. The reason for this is that DWARFv2 does not include DW_AT_type in DW_TAG_enumeration_type. This was added in DWARF v3: In C or C++, the underlying type will be the appropriate integral type determined by the compiler from the properties of the enumeration literal values." I noticed that gcc does emit this attribute for DWARF v2 but not when strict DWARF is requested (more details in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063#c7). This patch changes to clang to do the same. This will improve the experience of anyone using tools that can understand the attribute but for whatever reason are stuck building binaries containing v2 only. You can see a current clang/gcc comparison here: https://godbolt.org/z/eG9Kc9WGf https://reviews.llvm.org/D42734 added the original code that emitted this for >= v3 only. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98335.diff 3 Files Affected:
diff --git a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfUnit.cpp b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfUnit.cpp
index 6c04fa1c67a95..e76b0fe2081c0 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfUnit.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfUnit.cpp
@@ -1585,7 +1585,7 @@ void DwarfUnit::constructEnumTypeDIE(DIE &Buffer, const DICompositeType *CTy) {
const DIType *DTy = CTy->getBaseType();
bool IsUnsigned = DTy && DD->isUnsignedDIType(DTy);
if (DTy) {
- if (DD->getDwarfVersion() >= 3)
+ if (!Asm->TM.Options.DebugStrictDwarf || DD->getDwarfVersion() >= 3)
addType(Buffer, DTy);
if (DD->getDwarfVersion() >= 4 && (CTy->getFlags() & DINode::FlagEnumClass))
addFlag(Buffer, dwarf::DW_AT_enum_class);
diff --git a/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/debug-info-enum.ll b/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/debug-info-enum.ll
index 85e22931a5fc1..9af465d59b7d9 100644
--- a/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/debug-info-enum.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/debug-info-enum.ll
@@ -2,11 +2,17 @@
; * test value representation for each possible underlying integer type
; * test the integer type is as expected
; * test the DW_AT_enum_class attribute is present (resp. absent) as expected.
+; * test that DW_AT_type is present for v3 and greater, and v2 when strict DWARF
+; is not enabled.
; RUN: llc -debugger-tune=gdb -dwarf-version=4 -filetype=obj -o %t.o < %s
-; RUN: llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info %t.o | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK --check-prefix=CHECK-DW4
+; RUN: llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info %t.o | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-DW4,CHECK-TYPE
+; RUN: llc -debugger-tune=gdb -dwarf-version=3 -filetype=obj -o %t.o < %s
+; RUN: llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info %t.o | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-TYPE
; RUN: llc -debugger-tune=gdb -dwarf-version=2 -filetype=obj -o %t.o < %s
-; RUN: llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info %t.o | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK --check-prefix=CHECK-DW2
+; RUN: llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info %t.o | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-TYPE
+; RUN: llc -debugger-tune=gdb -dwarf-version=2 -strict-dwarf=true -filetype=obj -o %t.o < %s
+; RUN: llvm-dwarfdump -debug-info %t.o | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-DW2-STRICT
@x0 = global i8 0, align 1, !dbg !0
@x1 = global i8 0, align 1, !dbg !46
@@ -34,8 +40,8 @@
!8 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A0", value: -128)
!9 = !DIEnumerator(name: "B0", value: 127)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"signed char"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"signed char"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E0")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -51,8 +57,8 @@
!12 = !{!13}
!13 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A1", value: 255, isUnsigned: true)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"unsigned char"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"unsigned char"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E1")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -66,8 +72,8 @@
!17 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A2", value: -32768)
!18 = !DIEnumerator(name: "B2", value: 32767)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}} "short"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}} "short"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E2")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -83,8 +89,8 @@
!21 = !{!22}
!22 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A3", value: 65535, isUnsigned: true)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"unsigned short"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE DW_AT_type{{.*}}"unsigned short"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E3")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -98,8 +104,8 @@
!26 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A4", value: -2147483648)
!27 = !DIEnumerator(name: "B4", value: 2147483647)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"int"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"int"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E4")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -115,8 +121,8 @@
!30 = !{!31}
!31 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A5", value: 4294967295, isUnsigned: true)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"unsigned int"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"unsigned int"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E5")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -130,8 +136,8 @@
!35 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A6", value: -9223372036854775808)
!36 = !DIEnumerator(name: "B6", value: 9223372036854775807)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"long long int"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"long long int"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E6")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -147,8 +153,8 @@
!39 = !{!40}
!40 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A7", value: 18446744073709551615, isUnsigned: true)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"long long unsigned int"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"long long unsigned int"
; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_enum_class (true)
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E7")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -163,8 +169,8 @@
!43 = !DIEnumerator(name: "A8", value: -128)
!44 = !DIEnumerator(name: "B8", value: 127)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
-; CHECK-DW2-NOT: DW_AT_type
-; CHECK-DW4: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"int"
+; CHECK-DW2-STRICT-NOT: DW_AT_type
+; CHECK-TYPE: DW_AT_type{{.*}}"int"
; CHECK-NOT: DW_AT_enum_class
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E8")
diff --git a/llvm/test/DebugInfo/X86/dbg-rust-valid-enum-as-scope.ll b/llvm/test/DebugInfo/X86/dbg-rust-valid-enum-as-scope.ll
index f44ca04e0fd96..a6f24081d63ee 100644
--- a/llvm/test/DebugInfo/X86/dbg-rust-valid-enum-as-scope.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/DebugInfo/X86/dbg-rust-valid-enum-as-scope.ll
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
; CHECK: DW_AT_language (DW_LANG_Rust)
; CHECK: DW_TAG_namespace
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumeration_type
+; CHECK: DW_AT_type (0x{{[0-9]+}} "u8")
; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("E")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
; CHECK: DW_TAG_enumerator
@@ -12,6 +13,8 @@
; CHECK: NULL
; CHECK: NULL
; CHECK: NULL
+; CHECK: DW_TAG_base_type
+; CHECK: DW_AT_name ("u8")
; CHECK: DW_TAG_pointer_type
; CHECK: NULL
|
How many of these folks exist, I've no idea. Not many I expect, but it was easy enough to implement so I figured why not. |
|
@Michael137 I'll update the lldb test case if/when this lands. Unless your matrix is using strict-dwarf that is. |
Michael137
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2024
Can confirm the bot isn't using strict-dwarf |
pogo59
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2024
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/159/builds/1954 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference: |
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/73/builds/1711 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference: |
|
Timeouts resolved themselves on the next runs. |
DavidSpickett
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 12, 2024
Since #98335 clang adds DW_AT_type, unless strict DWARF is requested.
aaryanshukla
pushed a commit
to aaryanshukla/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2024
…rict DWARF v2 mode (llvm#98335) During testing of llvm#96202 we found that when clang set to DWARF v2 was used to build the test file, lldb could not tell that the unsigned enum type was in fact unsigned. So it defaulted to signed and printed the wrong value. The reason for this is that DWARFv2 does not include DW_AT_type in DW_TAG_enumeration_type. This was added in DWARF v3: "The enumeration type entry may also have a DW_AT_type attribute which refers to the underlying data type used to implement the enumeration. In C or C++, the underlying type will be the appropriate integral type determined by the compiler from the properties of the enumeration literal values." I noticed that gcc does emit this attribute for DWARF v2 but not when strict DWARF is requested (more details in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063#c7). This patch changes to clang to do the same. This will improve the experience of anyone using tools that can understand the attribute but for whatever reason are stuck building binaries containing v2 only. You can see a current clang/gcc comparison here: https://godbolt.org/z/eG9Kc9WGf https://reviews.llvm.org/D42734 added the original code that emitted this for >= v3 only.
aaryanshukla
pushed a commit
to aaryanshukla/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2024
Since llvm#98335 clang adds DW_AT_type, unless strict DWARF is requested.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
During testing of #96202 we found that when clang set to DWARF v2 was used to build the test file, lldb could not tell that the unsigned enum type was in fact unsigned. So it defaulted to signed and printed the wrong value.
The reason for this is that DWARFv2 does not include DW_AT_type in DW_TAG_enumeration_type. This was added in DWARF v3:
"The enumeration type entry may also have a DW_AT_type attribute which refers to the underlying data type used to implement the enumeration.
In C or C++, the underlying type will be the appropriate integral type determined by the compiler from the properties of the enumeration literal values."
I noticed that gcc does emit this attribute for DWARF v2 but not when strict DWARF is requested (more details in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063#c7).
This patch changes to clang to do the same. This will improve the experience of anyone using tools that can understand the attribute but for whatever reason are stuck building binaries containing v2 only.
You can see a current clang/gcc comparison here: https://godbolt.org/z/eG9Kc9WGf
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42734 added the original code that emitted this for >= v3 only.