vsk added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/CodeGenObjC/debug-info-blocks.m:20
// CHECK: call {{.*}}, !dbg ![[DBG_LINE:[0-9]+]]
// CHECK-NOT: ret
// CHECK: load {{.*}}, !dbg ![[COPY_LINE:[0-9]+]]
----------------
aprantl wrote:
> aprantl wrote:
> > vsk wrote:
> > > aprantl wrote:
> > > > What's the location used for the ret? I think it should also be`
> > > > ![[DBG_LINE]]` since we are not actually executing the block.
> > > We're using COPY_LINE, which is the same location used for the load
> > > instruction below.
> > >
> > > What's the semantic difference between DBG_LINE (line 0) and COPY_LINE
> > > (line 68) anyway? Why do we have two different locations for the
> > > arguments to this function?
> > The debugger will skip over line 0 locations when single-stepping or when
> > setting breakpoints. I can't tell without reading the code why we decide to
> > put a line 0 on the call.
> The important thing is that the testcase should check that the ret has either
> COPY_LINE or line 0 on it and not line 71.
I'll fix up the test case.
It looks like the zero location is an artifact of
CodeGenFunction::StartFunction:
```
1128 // Emit a location at the end of the prologue.
1129 if (CGDebugInfo *DI = getDebugInfo())
1130 DI->EmitLocation(Builder, StartLoc);
```
I think it's unnecessary, but maybe we can look into that separately?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D39310
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
