[PATCH] D35979: [X86] Fix a crash in FEntryInserter Pass.
David Blaikie via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jul 28 11:38:37 PDT 2017
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:23 AM Manoj Gupta via Phabricator <
reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
> manojgupta marked 3 inline comments as done.
> manojgupta added a comment.
> David, your comment didn't make it here. So adding it myself.
> The call to fentry is unconditionally added to the beginning of function.
& the other instruction may not be in the entry block?
> Should the call use the same debug location of the previous instruction if
No - it'll probably get that location anyway, later on/at code generation
time, but you shouldn't add it to the instruction itself if it doesn't have
any reason to be related/at that location.
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:33 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
> Depends what you mean by "unrelated" - if the new instruction is created
> because of/only in the presence of the old instruction, yaeh, using its
> debugloc may be appropriate. (Though if the new instruction may be created
> in a different basic block - that gets trickier)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-commits