ABataev added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Cuda.cpp:353
CmdArgs.push_back(Args.MakeArgString(Output.getFilename()));
+ if (mustEmitDebugInfo(Args) && Args.hasArg(options::OPT_g_Flag))
+ CmdArgs.push_back("-g");
----------------
tra wrote:
> ABataev wrote:
> > tra wrote:
> > > There's more than one -g option. Presumably you still want -g here for
> > > -g{1,2,3} or -ggdb{1,2,3} or -gdwarf2.
> > >
> > > Speaking of dwarf, what's going to happen if someone passes -gdwarf5?
> > > Should we downgrade it to -gdwarf2 on device side and issue a warning?
> > >
> > That's exactly what I want to avoid. I think we can ignore these options
> > and handle only `-g` option.
> > Or I can add a function to ToolChain class to force using the default
> > settings for debugger tuning and DWARF version rather than take them from
> > the driver options.
> You should handle at least -gN/-gline-tables-only/-g. Now that we can emit
> dwarf debug info, I would want to be able to control it to some degree --
> off/line-info-only/full.
>
> I'm still not sure what's the plan for -gdwarfN unsupported on device side?
> - do we ignore it and always emit dwarf2?
> - do we accept it, emit requested version and let user stare at ptxas (or
> cuda-gdb) errors when it fails to deal with it?
>
>
>
>
1. Ok, will look at this
2. -gdwarfN should be ignored, we should always emit DWARF2, otherwise, it will
break ptxas.
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42581
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
