[Dwarf-Discuss] DWARF and source text embedding
Thu Feb 1 21:52:49 GMT 2018
> -----Original Message-----
> From: scott at scottlinder.com [mailto:scott at scottlinder.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 12:02 PM
> To: Robinson, Paul; dwarf-discuss at lists.dwarfstd.org
> Subject: RE: [Dwarf-Discuss] DWARF and source text embedding
> Hi Paul,
> My intention was to support an empty source string; I want to be
> explicit about the presence of embedded source for each file.
Hmmm I guess in C it's possible to do something like #include a
file that happens to be empty, although such a file would have
nothing in it that could be referenced from DWARF and so there's
no reason to include it in the file table in the first place.
Therefore I'm not convinced the situation you describe is worth
In any event, go ahead and file the issue as Michael asked (if you
haven't already) and it'll get hashed out in committee. :-)
> When reading the spec I did notice places where an empty string can
> indicate the absence of the attribute (e.g. DW_AT_name), but I would
> prefer to be explicit here.
> On 2018-02-01 11:19, paul.robinson at sony.com wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Dwarf-Discuss [mailto:dwarf-discuss-bounces at lists.dwarfstd.org]
> >> On
> >> Behalf Of scott at scottlinder.com
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 2:05 PM
> >> To: dwarf-discuss at lists.dwarfstd.org
> >> Subject: [Dwarf-Discuss] DWARF and source text embedding
> >> Hello all,
> >> I am a compiler engineer at AMD, working on tools for debugging
> >> online-compiled
> >> programs. The problem I am attempting to solve was brought up
> >> previously
> >> in the
> >> DWARF Standard issue 161018.1 titled "DWARF-embedded source for
> >> online-compiled
> >> programs", and is the result of runtimes like OpenCL doing online
> >> compilation
> >> in an environment where it is not desireable (or even feasible) to
> >> write
> >> sources to disk. In these cases, it would be useful to support
> >> embedding
> >> the
> >> source directly in the resulting DWARF. I would like to propose a
> >> similar
> >> solution to the one outlined in the above issue, but without
> >> structural
> >> changes
> >> to the specification.
> >> ====
> >> Add two new optional fields to the file_names prologue of the line
> >> table.
> >> Section 22.214.171.124:
> >> Add two bullets after "5. DW_LNCT_MD5"
> >> 6. DW_LNCT_has_source
> >> DW_LNCT_has_source indicates that the value is a boolean which
> >> affects the
> >> interpretation of an accompanying DW_LNCT_source value. When
> >> present
> >> there
> >> must be an accompanying DW_LNCT_source value. When true,
> >> consumers
> >> may use
> >> the embedded source instead of attempting to discover the source
> >> on
> >> disk.
> >> When false, consumers will ignore the DW_LNCT_source value. This
> >> code point
> >> is always paired with a flag form (e.g. DW_FORM_flag or
> >> DW_FORM_flag_present).
> >> 7. DW_LNCT_source
> >> DW_LNCT_source indicates that the value is a null-terminated
> >> string
> >> which
> >> is the original source text of the file. When present there must
> >> be
> >> an
> >> accompanying DW_LNCT_has_source value. The string will contain
> >> the
> >> UTF-8
> >> encoded source text with '\n' line endings. When the accompanying
> >> DW_LNCT_has_source value is false, the value of DW_LNCT_source
> >> will
> >> be the
> >> empty string. This code point is always paired with a string form
> >> (e.g.
> >> DW_FORM_string, DW_FORM_line_strp, DW_FORM_strp).
> > Would a zero-length string indicate something other than
> > "has_source=false"?
> > If not, then a separate has_source flag seems redundant.
> > --paulr
> >> New type codes can be allocated for them in a backwards-compatible
> >> way,
> >> or
> >> codes for these new content types can be added in the range of
> >> [DW_LNCT_lo_user, DW_LNCT_hi_user] to avoid changing the spec itself.
> >> Table 7.27:
> >> Add DW_LNCT_has_source 0x6
> >> Add DW_LNCT_source 0x7
> >> Any DWARFv5 consumer which is unaware of this extension would continue
> >> to
> >> operate as before, ignoring the new fields. Any consumer which is
> >> aware
> >> of the
> >> extension would know to check DW_LNCT_has_source for each file_name
> >> entry in
> >> order to determine whether the embedded source field (DW_LNCT_source)
> >> contains
> >> the source text of the corresponding file.
> >> ====
> >> My team and I believe this simplifies the design by removing the need
> >> for
> >> changes to the compile unit sections, and by avoiding the addition of
> >> multiple
> >> file_name_entry_formats in a single program, all without sacrificing
> >> any
> >> information. We have a preliminary implementation in LLVM/Clang, which
> >> supports
> >> embedding source (clang -gdwarf-5 -gembed-source) and inspecting it
> >> via
> >> llvm-dwarfdump and llvm-objdump (with the -source flag). The patches
> >> are
> >> available at https://reviews.llvm.org/D42765 (LLVM) and
> >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D42766 (Clang).
> >> I would like any and all feedback on the design, and want to see about
> >> the
> >> possibility of adding the new content type codes outside of the "user"
> >> range
> >> (i.e. adding new entries for them in Table 7.27) in the next version
> >> of
> >> the
> >> specification.
> >> Regards,
> >> Scott Linder
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
> >> Dwarf-Discuss at lists.dwarfstd.org
> >> http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
More information about the Dwarf-discuss