[PATCH] D52927: [CodeGen] Fix for PR39094.

[Bjorn Pettersson via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

bjope added a comment.

Still no test case :-(

I think that without a test case it is hard to tell where the actual fault is here. Nor if this fix is the correct one.

Isn't the problem that someone puts the dbg.label inside a bundle? Should that be allowed?
Afaik lots of late passes see bundles as instructions (only iterating using bundle iterators and not looking inside bundles). So putting meta/debug-instructions inside bundles will just hide that instructions.

What would it mean to have the dbg.label between two instructions inside a bundle? Is it semantically equivalent to having the dbg.label before the bundle (or after)?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D52927