search for: d18583

...on. Fix both of these problems by avoiding use of the CloneDebugInfoMetadata function (which is only designed to do intra-module cloning) and cloning function-attached metadata in the same way that we clone all other metadata. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18583 During CloneFunctionInto we seem to create a new DISubprogram which still carries the name of the _original_ function. which creates certain confusion with debugging scope. Was it designed that way, or am I missing something here. Thanks a lot. Sergei --- Qualcomm Innova...

...on. Fix both of these problems by avoiding use of the CloneDebugInfoMetadata function (which is only designed to do intra-module cloning) and cloning function-attached metadata in the same way that we clone all other metadata. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18583 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk at 264935 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 we will have stale DISubprogram because RemapInstruction called from CloneFunctionInto() (here) // Loop over all instructions, fixing each one as we find it... for (In...

I will start from afar… When a dead function argument is removed, should we keep around the debug info for it? I have the following case: define internal fastcc void @foo(i8* %aa, i8* %reg, i8* %field, i32 %bb, ...) unnamed_addr #3 !dbg !28 { entry: call void @llvm.dbg.value(metabb i8* %aa, i64 0, metabb !34, metabb !47), !dbg !57 call void @llvm.dbg.value(metabb i8* %reg, i64 0,