https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121424
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|debug |middle-end
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2025-08-06
CC| |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So looking into the example further.
What is happening is GCC is duplicating the ret path for the case where the
return value of skip_prefix is 0 and recorded it as part of the inlined
function as the return statement didn't exactly have a line information
associated with it.
```
[/app/example.cpp:15:7] # DEBUG strD.2803 => NULL
[/app/example.cpp:15:7] # DEBUG prefixD.2804 => NULL
[/app/example.cpp:15:7] # DEBUG outD.2805 => NULL
# DEBUG pathD.2783 => path_14
[/app/example.cpp:19:3] # DEBUG BEGIN_STMT
[/app/example.cpp:19:10 discrim 1] # VUSE <.MEM_4(D)>
return path_14;
```
This is because the return statement lost its location when building ssa.
Before SSA we have:
```
[/app/example.cpp:19:3] # DEBUG BEGIN_STMT
[/app/example.cpp:19:10] D.2794 = pathD.2783;
[/app/example.cpp:19:10 discrim 1] return D.2794;
```
But after we get:
```
_12 = pathD.2783;
[/app/example.cpp:19:10 discrim 1] # VUSE <.MEM_8>
return _12;
;; succ: EXIT /app/example.cpp:19:10
```
Looks like we also lost the line info for the `D.2794 = pathD.2783;` assignment
too.
I will take a look soon on why the line info is lost.
