Probably, but it would be good to know that this feature works on 32-bit 
inferiors in general so that's why I made the change. Specifically, it was 
failing with gcc 4.6.2 (with -O0).

On 2013-10-02, at 9:52 PM, Richard Mitton <[email protected]> wrote:

> Isn't this actually a compiler bug? I mean, in a non-optimized build, you 
> would expect all code relevant to a source line to be emitted in strict 
> order, with correct line numbers.
> 
> (i.e. it shouldn't be putting code for parameters before the line itself, 
> unless some kind of optimization is enabled)
> 
> Richard Mitton
> [email protected]
> 
> On 09/26/2013 01:54 PM, Matt Kopec wrote:
>> Author: mkopec
>> Date: Thu Sep 26 15:54:17 2013
>> New Revision: 191457
>> 
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=191457&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Fix the thread jump test case for 32-bit inferiors. A jump was going back to 
>> a function call using a source line number. However, the parameters being 
>> passed to the function were setup before the instruction we jumped to. In 
>> other words, the source line was associated with assembly after the function 
>> parameters had been setup for the function to be called.
>> 
>> Modified:
>>     lldb/trunk/test/functionalities/thread/jump/main.cpp
>> 
>> Modified: lldb/trunk/test/functionalities/thread/jump/main.cpp
>> URL: 
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/lldb/trunk/test/functionalities/thread/jump/main.cpp?rev=191457&r1=191456&r2=191457&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- lldb/trunk/test/functionalities/thread/jump/main.cpp (original)
>> +++ lldb/trunk/test/functionalities/thread/jump/main.cpp Thu Sep 26 15:54:17 
>> 2013
>> @@ -26,9 +26,10 @@ int main ()
>>  {
>>      int i;
>>      double j;
>> -
>> -    i = min(4, 5); // 3rd marker
>> -    j = min(7.0, 8.0); // 4th marker
>> +    int min_i_a = 4, min_i_b = 5;
>> +    double min_j_a = 7.0, min_j_b = 8.0;
>> +    i = min(min_i_a, min_i_b); // 3rd marker
>> +    j = min(min_j_a, min_j_b); // 4th marker
>>        return 0;
>>  }
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> lldb-commits mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-commits mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits


_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to