[PATCH] D105162: Avoid misleading line table when Localizer sinks an instruction to another basic block

[Adrian Prantl via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

aprantl added a comment.

In D105162#2850394 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D105162#2850394>, @vsk wrote:

> Is this a case where the guidance (as-written) suggests dropping the location instead?

Yes. And I wonder if we should update the guidance. Literally dropping the location would result in the last instruction's location being carried forward. We don't want the inserted instruction to keep its location from the other basic block, but associating it with the previous instruction's location would also be wrong since we are inserting it on behalf of the next instruction (the insertion point). Maybe this isn't so much sinking an instruction but expanding an existing instruction?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D105162/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D105162