The test only checks the existence of the `Types CU list` line.
Unfortunately I can't make a better test because
{gcc,clang} -fuse-ld={lld,gold} --gdb-index do not give me a non-empty types CU list.
Reviewed By: ikudrin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63537
llvm-svn: 363800
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
I did this a long time ago with a janky python script, but now
clang-format has built-in support for this. I fed clang-format every
line with a #include and let it re-sort things according to the precise
LLVM rules for include ordering baked into clang-format these days.
I've reverted a number of files where the results of sorting includes
isn't healthy. Either places where we have legacy code relying on
particular include ordering (where possible, I'll fix these separately)
or where we have particular formatting around #include lines that
I didn't want to disturb in this patch.
This patch is *entirely* mechanical. If you get merge conflicts or
anything, just ignore the changes in this patch and run clang-format
over your #include lines in the files.
Sorry for any noise here, but it is important to keep these things
stable. I was seeing an increasing number of patches with irrelevant
re-ordering of #include lines because clang-format was used. This patch
at least isolates that churn, makes it easy to skip when resolving
conflicts, and gets us to a clean baseline (again).
llvm-svn: 304787
It is useful to output size of ranges when address ranges
section of .gdb_index is dumped.
It helps to compare outputs produced by different linkers,
for example. In that case address ranges can look very different,
when they are the same at fact. Difference comes from different
low address because of different address of .text.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32492
llvm-svn: 301527
