https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315
Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org, | |rth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I'm not very familiar with the var tracking code, but one thing I see odd here is a ton of similar var_location notes attached to each instruction (well, not each instruction, but a lot of the instructions are affected while generating code for test01, test02, test03, test04, etc). I see an instruction like this: (insn:TI 52195 52199 83288 6386 (set (mem/c:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -25880 [0xffffffffffff9ae8])) [125 %sfp+-25864 S8 A64]) (reg:DI 0 ax)) 89 {*movdi_internal} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 0 ax) (nil))) (jump_insn 83288 52195 83289 6386 (set (pc) (label_ref 34659)) 653 {jump} (nil) -> 34659) Followed by over 1000 var_location notes: (note 11489581 83289 11489582 (var_location this(0x7fffe7223360) (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -21808 [0xffffffffffffaad0]))) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION) (note 11489582 11489581 11489583 (var_location this(0x7fffe8d7dc60) (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -25200 [0xffffffffffff9d90]))) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION) (note 11489583 11489582 11489584 (var_location this(0x7fffe72236c0) (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -21856 [0xffffffffffffaaa0]))) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION) (note 11489584 11489583 11489585 (var_location this(0x7fffe7223bd0) (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -6576 [0xffffffffffffe650]))) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION) (note 11489585 11489584 11489586 (var_location this(0x7fffe7223cf0) (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -21872 [0xffffffffffffaa90]))) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION) (note 11489586 11489585 11489587 (var_location this(0x7fffe941e090) (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 6 bp) (const_int -25136 [0xffffffffffff9dd0]))) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION) etc etc etc . Notice all of them are the "this" pointer, but I have hacked the RTL dumping code to also print the address of the DECL to show that every "this" is actually a different instance. This looks suspect. Anyone have a clue, otherwise I'm going to continue banging my head against a wall here?