labath added a comment.

In D73206#1928710 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73206#1928710>, @jankratochvil 
wrote:

> In D73206#1871895 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73206#1871895>, @labath wrote:
>
> > Yep. It may be interesting to try this out on regular dwo first. Right now, 
> > dwo dodges this problem by storing a CompileUnit pointer on both skeleton 
> > and split units. If we can make this work without the split unit back 
> > pointer, then we can come move closer to how things work in llvm, and also 
> > pave the way for the dwz stuff.
>
>
> Just clarifying if you would therefore like to remove these two items:
>
>   SymbolFileDWARF &SymbolFileDWARFDwo::GetBaseSymbolFile() { return 
> m_base_symbol_file; }
>   SymbolFileDWARF &SymbolFileDWARFDwo::m_base_symbol_file;
>   


Eventually I'd like to delete the entire `SymbolFileDWARFDwo` class. Right now, 
it serves almost no useful purpose -- nearly all of its methods just redirect 
to the "base" symbol file in interesting (and confusing) ways. But I'm not sure 
that removing `GetBaseSymbolFile` is the right way to start that, as without it 
you cannot implement the redirection.

The way I was considering doing this was first ensuring that all other objects 
which store a SymbolFileDWARF pointer are updated to point to the "base" 
object. But there are probably even other things that need to be done before 
that, such as moving the lower-level dwarf stuff from SymbolFileDWARF to 
DWARFContext. Then the "base" DWARFContext could be directly responsible for 
creating "dwo" DWARFContexts (just like it is in llvm) and SymbolFileDWARFDwo 
could be removed. I am not sure how much work all of that is though...

Where are you going with that question? If it's stopping you from doing 
anything, I can try to look into that a bit closer...


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D73206/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D73206



_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to