jryans wrote:

> I would mention that AFAIK, a call_site entry can be useful iff:
>
> 1. is marked as a tail call (debuggers use it to show the artificial frames)
> 2. has call-site-paramters (debuggers use it along with entry_values)
> 
> Otherwise, we can avoid the call_sites in the final DWARF, and it should 
> reduce the final binary size.

Thanks for summarising those major use cases for the call site info.

>From a quick skim, I believe many of the added call site entries have call 
>site parameters (and thus add clear value assuming any callee variables use 
>`DW_OP_entry_value`). There are also some added non-tail call site entries 
>without call site parameters, and those indeed may not be used by debuggers 
>today (though perhaps some misc. tools use it to build a call graph).

If we wish to remove call site entries that don't seem to add value, I think it 
would be best to discuss that separately from this PR.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/166202
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to