kamleshbhalui added a comment. In D71508#1786148 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71508#1786148>, @probinson wrote:
> In D71508#1786122 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71508#1786122>, @kamleshbhalui > wrote: > > > In D71508#1785767 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71508#1785767>, @probinson > > wrote: > > > > > Do we have a similar problem if the filespec has an embedded ./ or ../ in > > > it? > > > > > > problems occur only when filespec starts with ./ otherwise it's fine. > > > So do other kinds of paths get canonicalized elsewhere? I'm thinking if > there's already a place that undoes embedded .. then it should handle leading > . as well. other canonicalization happens here https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/blob/master/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp#L541 and https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/blob/master/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp#L441 but that does not undo any embedded . and .. anywhere,except leading ./ i.e. when we pass like $clang .././p1.c -S -emit-llvm -g IRGen gives single file entry like this !1 = !DIFile(filename: ".././p1.c" As you can see path is not canonicalized but it atleast does not have duplicate file entry. > Is a leading .. okay or a problem? yes It's ok in the sense ,it does not create duplicate file entry in debug info. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71508/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71508 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
