You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've spun this off from bug 36322 to track additional issues with
the current implementation of DWARF descriptions of C99 VLAs.
Initially I was curious what happened if a function with a VLA was
inlined into another function. Adrian Prantl pointed out the test
llvm/test/DebugInfo/X86/vla-dependencies.ll
which I started playing with.
Even without optimization, some curious things happen.
The subrange_type has a DW_AT_type which points to something called
"sizetype" which does not exist in the source. It also doesn't share
an abbrev with the other base types, because its attributes are in a
different order; this suggests some poor internal coding practice at least,
although it's not actually invalid DWARF.
With optimization, LLVM asserts, which is worth its own bug.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Extended Description
I've spun this off from bug 36322 to track additional issues with
the current implementation of DWARF descriptions of C99 VLAs.
Initially I was curious what happened if a function with a VLA was
inlined into another function. Adrian Prantl pointed out the test
llvm/test/DebugInfo/X86/vla-dependencies.ll
which I started playing with.
Even without optimization, some curious things happen.
The subrange_type has a DW_AT_type which points to something called
"sizetype" which does not exist in the source. It also doesn't share
an abbrev with the other base types, because its attributes are in a
different order; this suggests some poor internal coding practice at least,
although it's not actually invalid DWARF.
With optimization, LLVM asserts, which is worth its own bug.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: