ikudrin added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23160#506061, @vsk wrote:
> I guess it never makes sense to have two regions with the exact same
> start/end loc, and different counters. Do you think we should add assertions
> in llvm (either in llvm-cov, or in the coverage reader) which guard against
> this?
Right now we can have several ranges with the same start and end locations in
case of macro fully expanded into another macro. We consider this situation
possible and handle it in class `SegmentBuilder` in
llvm/lib/ProfileData/Coverage/CoverageMapping.cpp. Maybe something has to be
fixed here too.
By the way, thinking about your words, I found another example which results in
spawning not only redundant but also wrong counters. I'm postponing landing
this patch until I finish the investigation.
4| 1|void dummy() {}
| 2|
4| 3|#define M_INT dummy()
| 4|
11| 5|#define MACRO M_INT
| 6|
| 7|int main()
1| 8|{
1| 9| int i = 0;
11| 10| while (i++ < 10)
10| 11| if (i < 5)
10| 12| MACRO;
------------------
| | 11| 5|#define MACRO M_INT
| | ------------------
| | | | 4| 3|#define M_INT dummy()
| | ------------------
------------------
1| 13| return 0;
1| 14|}
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23160
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
