[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D61292: Include inlined functions when figuring out a contiguous address range

António Afonso via Phabricator via lldb-commits lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Apr 29 19:09:06 PDT 2019

aadsm created this revision.
aadsm added reviewers: clayborg, jasonmolenda.
Herald added subscribers: lldb-commits, jdoerfert, eraman, mgorny.
Herald added a project: LLDB.

This diff changes the function `LineEntry::GetSameLineContiguousAddressRange` so that it also includes function calls that were inlined at the same line of code.

My motivation is to decrease the step over time of lines that heavly rely on inlined functions. I have multiple examples in the code base I work that makes a step over stop 20 or mote times internally. This can easly had up to step overs that take >500ms which I was able to lower to 25ms with this new strategy.

The reason the current code is not extending the address range beyond an inlined function is because when we resolve the symbol at the next address of the line entry we will get the entry line corresponding to where the original code for the inline function lives, making us barely extend the range. This then will end up on a step over having to stop multiple times everytime there's an inlined function.

To check if the range is an inlined function at that line I also get the block associated with the next address and check if there is a parent block with a call site at the line we're trying to extend.

To check this I created a new function in Block called `GetContainingInlinedBlockWithCallSite` that does exactly that. I also added a new function to Declaration for convinence of checking file/line named `CompareFileAndLine`.

To avoid potential issues when extending an address range I added an `Extend` function that extends the range by the AddressRange given as an argument. This function returns true to indicate sucess when the rage was agumented, false otherwise (e.g.: the ranges are not connected). The reason I do is to make sure that we're not just blindly extending complete_line_range by whatever `GetByteSize()` we got. If for some reason the ranges are not connected or overlap, or even 0, this could be an issue.

I also added a unit tests for this change and include the instructions on the test itself on how to generate the yaml file I use for testing.

  rG LLVM Github Monorepo



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D61292.197245.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 60836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20190430/d8f25e71/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the lldb-commits mailing list