rnk added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp:992
getTagForRecord(RD), RDName, Ctx, DefUnit, Line, 0, Size, Align,
llvm::DINode::FlagFwdDecl, Identifier);
if (CGM.getCodeGenOpts().DebugFwdTemplateParams)
----------------
One alternative would be to add `llvm::DINode::FlagNonTrivial` here if the type
is complete and not trivial.
There is the case where the the compiler has to emit a method type when the
class has been forward declared, and that could still lead to duplicate
records. For example:
```
class Returned;
class Foo {
Foo();
Returned bar();
};
Foo::Foo() {}
```
In this example, clang will have to describe the method type of Foo::bar, but
it will not have access to Returned. I think in practice this won't come up,
because Foo::bar will be defined in the same file as the constructor.
================
Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/IR/DebugInfoFlags.def:61
HANDLE_DI_FLAG((1 << 29), AllCallsDescribed)
+HANDLE_DI_FLAG((1 << 30), CxxReturnUdt)
----------------
@dblaikie @aprantl, does this seem like a reasonable flag to add, or should we
mark record forward decls as trivial/nontrivial instead?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/CodeViewDebug.cpp:407
static bool isNonTrivial(const DICompositeType *DCTy) {
return ((DCTy->getFlags() & DINode::FlagNonTrivial) ==
DINode::FlagNonTrivial);
}
----------------
Should we assert here that the composite type is not a forward decl, assuming
we stick with the CxxReturn flag?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/CodeViewDebug.cpp:420
// DISubroutineType is unnamed. Use DISubprogram's i.e. SPName in comparison.
if (ClassTy && isNonTrivial(ClassTy) && SPName == ClassTy->getName()) {
FO |= FunctionOptions::Constructor;
----------------
We also use isNonTrivial here, but I think if we are emitting a method type, it
means the class must not be a forward declaration?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75215/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75215
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
