aprantl requested changes to this revision. aprantl added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed.
I don't think the implementation is correct, see inline comments. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td:1943 +def gno_inline_line_tables : Flag<["-"], "gno-inline-line-tables">, + Flags<[CC1Option, CoreOption]>, HelpText<"Don't emit inline line tables">; ---------------- As a DWARF person, this option name is a little confusing since in DWARF inline info is part of debug info, not the line table, but few end-users would actually know. I would probably have called it -gno-inline-info or -gno-inlined-functions. I don't have strong feelings about it though. ================ Comment at: llvm/docs/LangRef.rst:1437 +``"no-inline-line-tables"`` + When this attribute is set to true, inline line tables are not generated + for this function if it is inlined and the location of the inlined code ---------------- Same comment for the attribute. ================ Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/InlineFunction.cpp:1426 + // If we are not generating inline line tables, set the debug location + // of the inlined code to be the call site. + DebugLoc IDL = ---------------- This will probably cause some IR Verifier failures and very confusing debug info when inlining dbg.value intrinsics. The correct thing to do here is probably to assign line 0 to the inlined instructions and remove all debug info intrinsics. Otherwise the inlined variables will show up in the parent frame, which will screw up debugging. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67723/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67723 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
