mib added a subscriber: DavidSpickett. mib added a comment. In D115313#3178578 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115313#3178578>, @dblaikie wrote:
> Side note: The src_file is not to be trusted/used either - once line 0 is > specified, nothing else in that line entry is valid. LLVM lets the previous > line entries file persist because this reduces encoding size (by not having > to switch all the fields in the line table - only the line number - back and > forth over a line number 0 area). eg: previous entry in the line table might > be from a #include of some code (as in clang/llvm's use of .def files, for > instance) into a function, or from some inlining above the line 0 region, etc. > > So maybe "artificial location in function <X>" might be suitable? (the actual > code at line 0 might still be from some inlining (LLVM does try to scope it - > so the instruction should have the nearest common scope (in terms of lexical > scopes or inlined functions) so if A has B inlined, B has C and D inlined > into it and some code is commoned between C and D, it should be attributed to > the inlined region of B - but if it's hoisted out of a basic block, I don't > think we can properly attribute it to any scope, and so we'd have to > attribute it to A in the scope DIE information (in all these cases it'd still > have line 0, though). Thanks for clarifying @DavidSpickett ! I'll change the warning accordingly. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115313/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115313 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
