This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: lto gimple types and debug info
- From: "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: "Mark Mitchell" <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "David Edelsohn" <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>, "Kenneth Zadeck" <zadeck at naturalbridge dot com>, "GCC Development" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Diego Novillo" <dnovillo at google dot com>, "Hubicha, Jan" <jh at suse dot cz>, "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, "Taylor, Ian Lance" <iant at google dot com>, "Ollie Wild" <aaw at google dot com>, "Maddox, Bill" <maddox at google dot com>, jason at redhat dot com, "Rafael Espindola" <espindola at google dot com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:07:38 -0400
- Subject: Re: lto gimple types and debug info
- References: <488A6E70.2060708@codesourcery.com> <200807261748.m6QHmh0O027966@makai.watson.ibm.com> <488CADFB.4020007@codesourcery.com> <4aca3dc20807271134p2d2f40b7s637cf89926011155@mail.gmail.com> <488CC817.9040803@codesourcery.com> <4aca3dc20807271641w6d715dccwf48b44c631d92808@mail.gmail.com> <488D09C0.9090004@codesourcery.com>
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 7:50 PM, Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
>> Then again, I also don't see what the big deal about adding a debug
>> info parser is.
>
> OK, yes, we may need to read debug info back in.
>
> I don't see it as a big deal, either -- and I also don't see it as locking
> us into DWARF2. We can presumably read in any formats we are about, so if
> we want to add a stabs reader, we can do that to support stabs platforms.
> And, until we have a stabs reader, we can just drop debug info on those
> platforms when doing LTO. So, we just have to design LTO with some
> abstraction over debug info in mind.
Yes, this is what i would suggest.
I'll also note that GDB already contains such an abstraction, which
was based on STABS, rather than DWARF.
>
> In fact, we could probably treat DWARF as canonical, and have a STABS->DWARF
> input filter and DWARF->STABS output filter, if we like.
Sure. Again, this input filter is basically what GDB does, converting
DWARF -> internal debuginfo abstraction.