This patch hides the logic for setting the location kind of an entry
value inside the begin/finalize/cancel functions. This way we get rid
the strange workaround that is currently in setLocation().
In the future, this will allow us to set the location kind of the
entry value independently from the location kind of the main
expression.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96554
This patch moves the selection of the style used to emit the numbers
(DW_OP_implicit_value vs. DW_OP_const+DW_OP_stack_value) into
DwarfExpression::addUnsignedConstant. This logic is not FP-specific, and
it will be needed for large integers too.
The refactor also makes DW_OP_implicit_value (DW_OP_stack_value worked
already) be used for floating point constants other than float and
double, so I've added a _Float16 test for it.
Split off from D90916.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91058
Fix an out-of-bounds shift in emitLegacyZExt by using a slightly more
complicated dwarf expression to create the zext mask.
This addresses a UBSan diagnostic seen when compiling compiler-rt
(llvm.org/PR47927).
rdar://70307714
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89838
This patch was reverted in 7c182663a857fc87 due to some failures
observed on PCC based machines. Failures were due to Endianness issue and
long double representation issues.
Patch is revised to address Endianness issue. Furthermore, support
for emission of `DW_OP_implicit_value` for `long double` has been removed
(since it was unclean at the moment). Planning to handle this in
a clean way soon!
For more context, please refer to following review link.
Reviewed By: aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83560
llvm is missing support for DW_OP_implicit_value operation.
DW_OP_implicit_value op is indispensable for cases such as
optimized out long double variables.
For intro refer: DWARFv5 Spec Pg: 40 2.6.1.1.4 Implicit Location Descriptions
Consider the following example:
```
int main() {
long double ld = 3.14;
printf("dummy\n");
ld *= ld;
return 0;
}
```
when compiled with tunk `clang` as
`clang test.c -g -O1` produces following location description
of variable `ld`:
```
DW_AT_location (0x00000000:
[0x0000000000201691, 0x000000000020169b): DW_OP_constu 0xc8f5c28f5c28f800, DW_OP_stack_value, DW_OP_piece 0x8, DW_OP_constu 0x4000, DW_OP_stack_value, DW_OP_bit_piece 0x10 0x40, DW_OP_stack_value)
DW_AT_name ("ld")
```
Here one may notice that this representation is incorrect(DWARF4
stack could only hold integers(and only up to the size of address)).
Here the variable size itself is `128` bit.
GDB and LLDB confirms this:
```
(gdb) p ld
$1 = <invalid float value>
(lldb) frame variable ld
(long double) ld = <extracting data from value failed>
```
GCC represents/uses DW_OP_implicit_value in these sort of situations.
Based on the discussion with Jakub Jelinek regarding GCC's motivation
for using this, I concluded that DW_OP_implicit_value is most appropriate
in this case.
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-July/233057.html
GDB seems happy after this patch:(LLDB doesn't have support
for DW_OP_implicit_value)
```
(gdb) p ld
p ld
$1 = 3.14000000000000012434
```
Reviewed By: aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83560
This patch was reverted in 9d2da6759b4d due to assertion failure seen
in `test/DebugInfo/Sparc/subreg.ll`. Assertion failure was happening
due to malformed/unhandeled DwarfExpression.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83560
Summary:
llvm is missing support for DW_OP_implicit_value operation.
DW_OP_implicit_value op is indispensable for cases such as
optimized out long double variables.
For intro refer: DWARFv5 Spec Pg: 40 2.6.1.1.4 Implicit Location Descriptions
Consider the following example:
```
int main() {
long double ld = 3.14;
printf("dummy\n");
ld *= ld;
return 0;
}
```
when compiled with tunk `clang` as
`clang test.c -g -O1` produces following location description
of variable `ld`:
```
DW_AT_location (0x00000000:
[0x0000000000201691, 0x000000000020169b): DW_OP_constu 0xc8f5c28f5c28f800, DW_OP_stack_value, DW_OP_piece 0x8, DW_OP_constu 0x4000, DW_OP_stack_value, DW_OP_bit_piece 0x10 0x40, DW_OP_stack_value)
DW_AT_name ("ld")
```
Here one may notice that this representation is incorrect(DWARF4
stack could only hold integers(and only up to the size of address)).
Here the variable size itself is `128` bit.
GDB and LLDB confirms this:
```
(gdb) p ld
$1 = <invalid float value>
(lldb) frame variable ld
(long double) ld = <extracting data from value failed>
```
GCC represents/uses DW_OP_implicit_value in these sort of situations.
Based on the discussion with Jakub Jelinek regarding GCC's motivation
for using this, I concluded that DW_OP_implicit_value is most appropriate
in this case.
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-July/233057.html
GDB seems happy after this patch:(LLDB doesn't have support
for DW_OP_implicit_value)
```
(gdb) p ld
p ld
$1 = 3.14000000000000012434
```
Reviewed By: aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83560
Summary:
This is a fix for PR45009.
When working on D67492 I made DwarfExpression emit a single
DW_OP_entry_value operation covering the whole composite location
description that is produced if a register does not have a valid DWARF
number, and is instead composed of multiple register pieces. Looking
closer at the standard, this appears to not be valid DWARF. A
DW_OP_entry_value operation's block can only be a DWARF expression or a
register location description, so it appears to not be valid for it to
hold a composite location description like that.
See DWARFv5 sec. 2.5.1.7:
"The DW_OP_entry_value operation pushes the value that the described
location held upon entering the current subprogram. It has two
operands: an unsigned LEB128 length, followed by a block containing a
DWARF expression or a register location description (see Section
2.6.1.1.3 on page 39)."
Here is a dwarf-discuss mail thread regarding this:
http://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org/2020-March/004610.html
There was not a strong consensus reached there, but people seem to lean
towards that operations specified under 2.6 (e.g. DW_OP_piece) may not
be part of a DWARF expression, and thus the DW_OP_entry_value operation
can't contain those.
Perhaps we instead want to emit a entry value operation per each
DW_OP_reg* operation, e.g.:
- DW_OP_entry_value(DW_OP_regx sub_reg0),
DW_OP_stack_value,
DW_OP_piece 8,
- DW_OP_entry_value(DW_OP_regx sub_reg1),
DW_OP_stack_value,
DW_OP_piece 8,
[...]
The question then becomes how the call site should look; should a
composite location description be emitted there, and we then leave it up
to the debugger to match those two composite location descriptions?
Another alternative could be to emit a call site parameter entry for
each sub-register, but firstly I'm unsure if that is even valid DWARF,
and secondly it seems like that would complicate the collection of call
site values quite a bit. As far as I can tell GCC does not emit any
entry values / call sites in these cases, so we do not have something to
compare with, but the former seems like the more reasonable approach.
Currently when trying to emit a call site entry for a parameter composed
of multiple DWARF registers a (DwarfRegs.size() == 1) assert is
triggered in addMachineRegExpression(). Until the call site
representation is figured out, and until there is use for these entry
values in practice, this commit simply stops the invalid DWARF from
being emitted.
Reviewers: djtodoro, vsk, aprantl
Reviewed By: djtodoro, vsk
Subscribers: jyknight, hiraditya, fedor.sergeev, jrtc27, llvm-commits
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75270
Summary:
A struct argument can be passed-by-value to a callee via a pointer to a
temporary stack copy. Add support for emitting an entry value DBG_VALUE
when an indirect parameter DBG_VALUE becomes unavailable. This is done
by omitting DW_OP_stack_value from the entry value expression, to make
the expression describe the location of an object.
rdar://63373691
Reviewers: djtodoro, aprantl, dstenb
Subscribers: hiraditya, lldb-commits, llvm-commits
Tags: #lldb, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80345
This patch fixes an assertion failure in DwarfExpression that is
triggered when a complex fragment has exactly the size of a
subregister of the register the DBG_VALUE points to *and* there is no
DWARF encoding for the super-register.
I took the opportunity to replace/document some magic values with
static constructor functions to make this code less confusing to read.
rdar://problem/58489125
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72938
Extends DWARF expression language to express locals/globals locations. (via
target-index operands atm) (possible variants are: non-virtual registers
or address spaces)
The WebAssemblyExplicitLocals can replace virtual registers to targertindex
operand type at the time when WebAssembly backend introduces
{get,set,tee}_local instead of corresponding virtual registers.
Reviewed By: aprantl, dschuff
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52634
Summary:
Internally in LLVM's metadata we use DW_OP_entry_value operations with
the same semantics as DWARF; that is, its operand specifies the number
of bytes that the entry value covers.
At the time of emitting entry values we don't know the emitted size of
the DWARF expression that the entry value will cover. Currently the size
is hardcoded to 1 in DIExpression, and other values causes the verifier
to fail. As the size is 1, that effectively means that we can only have
valid entry values for registers that can be encoded in one byte, which
are the registers with DWARF numbers 0 to 31 (as they can be encoded as
single-byte DW_OP_reg0..DW_OP_reg31 rather than a multi-byte
DW_OP_regx). It is a bit confusing, but it seems like llvm-dwarfdump
will print an operation "correctly", even if the byte size is less than
that, which may make it seem that we emit correct DWARF for registers
with DWARF numbers > 31. If you instead use readelf for such cases, it
will interpret the number of specified bytes as a DWARF expression. This
seems like a limitation in llvm-dwarfdump.
As suggested in D66746, a way forward would be to add an internal
variant of DW_OP_entry_value, DW_OP_LLVM_entry_value, whose operand
instead specifies the number of operations that the entry value covers,
and we then translate that into the byte size at the time of emission.
In this patch that internal operation is added. This patch keeps the
limitation that a entry value can only be applied to simple register
locations, but it will fix the issue with the size operand being
incorrect for DWARF numbers > 31.
Reviewers: aprantl, vsk, djtodoro, NikolaPrica
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: jyknight, fedor.sergeev, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67492
llvm-svn: 374881
Summary:
DWARF's DW_OP_entry_value operation has two operands; the first is a
ULEB128 operand that specifies the size of the second operand, which is
a DWARF block. This means that we need to be able to pre-calculate and
emit the size of DWARF expressions before emitting them. There is
currently no interface for doing this in DwarfExpression, so this patch
introduces that.
When implementing this I initially thought about running through
DwarfExpression's emission two times; first with a temporary buffer to
emit the expression, in order to being able to calculate the size of
that emitted data. However, DwarfExpression is a quite complex state
machine, so I decided against that, as it seemed like the two runs could
get out of sync, resulting in incorrect size operands. Therefore I have
implemented this in a way that we only have to run DwarfExpression once.
The idea is to emit DWARF to a temporary buffer, for which it is
possible to query the size. The data in the temporary buffer can then be
emitted to DwarfExpression's main output.
In the case of DIEDwarfExpression, a temporary DIE is used. The values
are all allocated using the same BumpPtrAllocator as for all other DIEs,
and the values are then transferred to the real value list. In the case
of DebugLocDwarfExpression, the temporary buffer is implemented using a
BufferByteStreamer which emits to a buffer in the DwarfExpression
object.
Reviewers: aprantl, vsk, NikolaPrica, djtodoro
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #debug-info, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67768
llvm-svn: 374879
Dump the DWARF information about call sites and call site parameters into
debug info sections.
The patch also provides an interface for the interpretation of instructions
that could load values of a call site parameters in order to generate DWARF
about the call site parameters.
([13/13] Introduce the debug entry values.)
Co-authored-by: Ananth Sowda <asowda@cisco.com>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Prica <nikola.prica@rt-rk.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Baev <ibaev@cisco.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60716
llvm-svn: 365467
Add the IR and the AsmPrinter parts for handling of the DW_OP_entry_values
DWARF operation.
([11/13] Introduce the debug entry values.)
Co-authored-by: Ananth Sowda <asowda@cisco.com>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Prica <nikola.prica@rt-rk.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Baev <ibaev@cisco.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60866
llvm-svn: 364542
The goal is to improve hwasan's error reporting for stack use-after-return by
recording enough information to allow the specific variable that was accessed
to be identified based on the pointer's tag. Currently we record the PC and
lower bits of SP for each stack frame we create (which will eventually be
enough to derive the base tag used by the stack frame) but that's not enough
to determine the specific tag for each variable, which is the stack frame's
base tag XOR a value (the "tag offset") that is unique for each variable in
a function.
In IR, the tag offset is most naturally represented as part of a location
expression on the llvm.dbg.declare instruction. However, the presence of the
tag offset in the variable's actual location expression is likely to confuse
debuggers which won't know about tag offsets, and moreover the tag offset
is not required for a debugger to determine the location of the variable on
the stack, so at the DWARF level it is represented as an attribute so that
it will be ignored by debuggers that don't know about it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63119
llvm-svn: 363635
Refactor location description kind in order to be easier for extensions
(needed for D60866).
In addition, cut off some bits from the other class fields.
Patch by Djordje Todorovic.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62002
llvm-svn: 361480
The PrologEpilogInserter need to insert a DW_OP_deref_size before
prepending a memory location expression to an already implicit
expression to avoid having the existing expression act on the memory
address instead of the value behind it.
The reason for using DW_OP_deref_size and not plain DW_OP_deref is that
big-endian targets need to read the right size as simply truncating a
larger read would yield the wrong result (LSB bytes are not at the lower
address).
This re-commit fixes issues reported in the first one. Namely deref was
inserted under wrong conditions and additionally the deref_size argument
was incorrectly encoded.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59687
llvm-svn: 359535
Introduce a DW_OP_LLVM_convert Dwarf expression pseudo op that allows
for a convenient way to perform type conversions on the Dwarf expression
stack. As an additional bonus it paves the way for using other Dwarf
v5 ops that need to reference a base_type.
The new DW_OP_LLVM_convert is used from lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
to perform sext/zext on debug values but mainly the patch is about
preparing terrain for adding other Dwarf v5 ops that need to reference a
base_type.
For Dwarf v5 the op maps to DW_OP_convert and for earlier versions a
complex shift & mask pattern is generated to emulate sext/zext.
This is a recommit of r356442 with trivial fixes for the failing tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56587
llvm-svn: 356451
Introduce a DW_OP_LLVM_convert Dwarf expression pseudo op that allows
for a convenient way to perform type conversions on the Dwarf expression
stack. As an additional bonus it paves the way for using other Dwarf
v5 ops that need to reference a base_type.
The new DW_OP_LLVM_convert is used from lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
to perform sext/zext on debug values but mainly the patch is about
preparing terrain for adding other Dwarf v5 ops that need to reference a
base_type.
For Dwarf v5 the op maps to DW_OP_convert and for earlier versions a
complex shift & mask pattern is generated to emulate sext/zext.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56587
llvm-svn: 356442
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Normalize common kinds of DWARF sub-expressions to make debug info
encoding a bit more compact:
DW_OP_constu [X < 32] -> DW_OP_litX
DW_OP_constu [all ones] -> DW_OP_lit0, DW_OP_not (64-bit only)
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51640
llvm-svn: 341457
For local variables the first DW_OP_deref is consumed by turning the
location kind into a memeory location, but that only makes sense for
values that are in a register to begin with, which cannot happen for
global variables that are attached to a symbol.
rdar://problem/39741860
This reapplies r330970 after fixing an uncovered bug in r331086 and
working around the situation caused by it.
llvm-svn: 331090
Summary:
This patch is part of 3 patches that together form a single patch, but must be introduced in stages in order not to break things.
The way that LLVM interprets DW_OP_plus in DIExpression nodes is basically that of the DW_OP_plus_uconst operator since LLVM expects an unsigned constant operand. This unnecessarily restricts the DW_OP_plus operator, preventing it from being used to describe the evaluation of runtime values on the expression stack. These patches try to align the semantics of DW_OP_plus and DW_OP_minus with that of the DWARF definition, which pops two elements off the expression stack, performs the operation and pushes the result back on the stack.
This is done in three stages:
• The first patch (LLVM) adds support for DW_OP_plus_uconst.
• The second patch (Clang) contains changes all its uses from DW_OP_plus to DW_OP_plus_uconst.
• The third patch (LLVM) changes the semantics of DW_OP_plus and DW_OP_minus to be in line with its DWARF meaning. This patch includes the bitcode upgrade from legacy DIExpressions.
Patch by Sander de Smalen.
Reviewers: echristo, pcc, aprantl
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: fhahn, javed.absar, aprantl, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33894
llvm-svn: 305386
- introduced in r300522 and found via the Swift LLDB testsuite.
The fix is to set the location kind to memory whenever an FrameIndex
location is emitted.
rdar://problem/31707602
llvm-svn: 300793
- introduced in r300522 and found via the Swift LLDB testsuite.
The fix is to set the location kind to memory whenever an FrameIndex
location is emitted.
rdar://problem/31707602
llvm-svn: 300790
The DWARF specification knows 3 kinds of non-empty simple location
descriptions:
1. Register location descriptions
- describe a variable in a register
- consist of only a DW_OP_reg
2. Memory location descriptions
- describe the address of a variable
3. Implicit location descriptions
- describe the value of a variable
- end with DW_OP_stack_value & friends
The existing DwarfExpression code is pretty much ignorant of these
restrictions. This used to not matter because we only emitted very
short expressions that we happened to get right by accident. This
patch makes DwarfExpression aware of the rules defined by the DWARF
standard and now chooses the right kind of location description for
each expression being emitted.
This would have been an NFC commit (for the existing testsuite) if not
for the way that clang describes captured block variables. Based on
how the previous code in LLVM emitted locations, DW_OP_deref
operations that should have come at the end of the expression are put
at its beginning. Fixing this means changing the semantics of
DIExpression, so this patch bumps the version number of DIExpression
and implements a bitcode upgrade.
There are two major changes in this patch:
I had to fix the semantics of dbg.declare for describing function
arguments. After this patch a dbg.declare always takes the *address*
of a variable as the first argument, even if the argument is not an
alloca.
When lowering a DBG_VALUE, the decision of whether to emit a register
location description or a memory location description depends on the
MachineLocation — register machine locations may get promoted to
memory locations based on their DIExpression. (Future) optimization
passes that want to salvage implicit debug location for variables may
do so by appending a DW_OP_stack_value. For example:
DBG_VALUE, [RBP-8] --> DW_OP_fbreg -8
DBG_VALUE, RAX --> DW_OP_reg0 +0
DBG_VALUE, RAX, DIExpression(DW_OP_deref) --> DW_OP_reg0 +0
All testcases that were modified were regenerated from clang. I also
added source-based testcases for each of these to the debuginfo-tests
repository over the last week to make sure that no synchronized bugs
slip in. The debuginfo-tests compile from source and run the debugger.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32382
<rdar://problem/31205000>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31439
llvm-svn: 300522
until the rest of the expression is known.
This is still an NFC refactoring in preparation of a subsequent bugfix.
This reapplies r298388 with a bugfix for non-physical frame registers.
llvm-svn: 298471
