[PATCH] D39310: [CGBlocks] Improve line info in backtraces containing *_helper_block

[Vedant Kumar via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

vsk added inline comments.


================
Comment at: test/CodeGenObjC/debug-info-blocks.m:13
 
-// rdar://problem/14386148
-// Test that we don't emit bogus line numbers for the helper functions.
-// Test that we do emit scope info for the helper functions.
+// rdar://problem/32907581
+// Test that we do emit scope info for the helper functions, and that the
----------------
aprantl wrote:
> We nowadays usually try to avoid rdar links in anything but commit messages because it is not helpful information for the LLVM community. It's better to just describe the issue at hand (which you are doing!) or create a PR with that contents and link to it.
Got it.


================
Comment at: test/CodeGenObjC/debug-info-blocks.m:20
 // CHECK: call {{.*}}, !dbg ![[DBG_LINE:[0-9]+]]
 // CHECK-NOT: ret
 // CHECK: load {{.*}}, !dbg ![[COPY_LINE:[0-9]+]]
----------------
aprantl wrote:
> What's the location used for the ret? I think it should also be` ![[DBG_LINE]]` since we are not actually executing the block.
We're using COPY_LINE, which is the same location used for the load instruction below.

What's the semantic difference between DBG_LINE (line 0) and COPY_LINE (line 68) anyway? Why do we have two different locations for the arguments to this function?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D39310