[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb] Implement DW_CFA_val_offset and DW_CFA_val_offset_sf (PR #150732)

[Daniel Sanders via lldb-commits]

dsandersllvm wrote:

While looking into that, I found a couple mistakes that made me question how it managed to work and I found that that bit is not actually used. ConcreteRegisterLocation uses eRegisterIsRegisterPlusOffset for all reg+offset's including reg=CFA, but AbstractRegisterLocation has a specific isCFAPlusOffset for the reg=CFA case so I didn't need to add isOtherRegisterPlusOffset

I just pushed an update that removes that unnecessary code and fixes the clang-format issue raised by the bot

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150732