================
@@ -1129,13 +1130,17 @@ static void
cloneInstructionsIntoPredecessorBlockAndUpdateSSAUses(
Instruction *NewBonusInst = BonusInst.clone();
- if (!isa<DbgInfoIntrinsic>(BonusInst) &&
- PTI->getDebugLoc() != NewBonusInst->getDebugLoc()) {
- // Unless the instruction has the same !dbg location as the original
- // branch, drop it. When we fold the bonus instructions we want to make
- // sure we reset their debug locations in order to avoid stepping on
- // dead code caused by folding dead branches.
- NewBonusInst->setDebugLoc(DebugLoc());
+ if (!isa<DbgInfoIntrinsic>(BonusInst)) {
+ if (!NewBonusInst->getDebugLoc().isSameSourceLocation(
+ PTI->getDebugLoc())) {
+ // Unless the instruction has the same !dbg location as the original
+ // branch, drop it. When we fold the bonus instructions we want to make
+ // sure we reset their debug locations in order to avoid stepping on
+ // dead code caused by folding dead branches.
+ NewBonusInst->setDebugLoc(DebugLoc());
+ } else if (const DebugLoc &DL = NewBonusInst->getDebugLoc()) {
+ mapAtomInstance(DL, VMap);
----------------
jmorse wrote:
What are the consequences for this when stepping -- this is an abnormal
situation seeing how the source location is identical to where it's being
hoisted to. Will developers potentially step on the same source location twice?
I understand the general situation of "code that is duplicated needs new atoms,
because there are now multiple key instructions", but wouldn't this be
different when the source-location at PTI potentially becomes key _because_
we've remapped a key instruction we've hoisted to beneath it?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133482
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
