On 2/9/23 03:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!

Before IMPORTED_DECL has been introduced in PR37410, we used to emit correct
DW_AT_decl_line on DW_TAG_imported_module on the testcase below, after that
change we haven't emitted it at all for a while and after some time
started emitting incorrect locus, in particular the location of } closing
the function.

The problem is that while we have correct EXPR_LOCATION on the USING_STMT,
when genericizing that USING_STMT into IMPORTED_DECL we don't copy the
location to DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION, so it gets whatever input_location happens
to be when it is created.

The following patch fixes that, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and
i686-linux, ok for trunk?

OK.

2023-02-09  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR debug/108716
        * cp-gimplify.cc (cp_genericize_r) <case USING_STMT>: Set
        DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION on IMPORTED_DECL to expression location
        of USING_STMT or input_location.

        * g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/pr108716.C: New test.

--- gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.cc.jj    2023-02-01 10:19:43.038140336 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.cc       2023-02-08 10:36:00.301501540 +0100
@@ -1514,6 +1514,8 @@ cp_genericize_r (tree *stmt_p, int *walk
                tree using_directive = make_node (IMPORTED_DECL);
                TREE_TYPE (using_directive) = void_type_node;
                DECL_CONTEXT (using_directive) = current_function_decl;
+               DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (using_directive)
+                 = cp_expr_loc_or_input_loc (stmt);
IMPORTED_DECL_ASSOCIATED_DECL (using_directive) = decl;
                DECL_CHAIN (using_directive) = BLOCK_VARS (block);
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/pr108716.C.jj     2023-02-08 
11:48:39.667385750 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/pr108716.C        2023-02-08 
11:48:57.998115610 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+// PR debug/108716
+// { dg-options "-O0 -gdwarf-5 -dA -fno-merge-debug-strings" }
+// { dg-final { scan-assembler "DIE \\(\[^\n\r\]*\\) 
DW_TAG_imported_module\[^\n\r\]*\[\n\r]*\[^\n\r\]* 
DW_AT_decl_file\[^\n\r\]*\[\n\r]*\[^\n\r\]*0xc\[^\n\r\]* 
DW_AT_decl_line\[^\n\r\]*\[\n\r]*(\[^\n\r\]*0x13\[^\n\r\]* 
DW_AT_decl_column\[^\n\r\]*\[\n\r]*)?" } }
+
+namespace M {
+  int x = 1;
+}
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  using namespace M;
+  return 0;
+}

        Jakub


Reply via email to