https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46238
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46238=edit
gcc9-pr90197-wip.patch
Untested WIP patch (for the C FE so far only, C++ needs something similar
though).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva ---
What's confusing to me is that, as far as I know, GDB pays no attention to
is_stmt yet.
So I think we should focus on what, if any, changes to the line number program
are brought about by enabling or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
__attribute__((noipa))
void
test (unsigned int *dst, unsigned int base, int count)
{
int i = 0;
while (i < count)
dst[i++] = (base += 15);
}
int
main (void)
{
unsigned int dst[100];
test (dst,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For the for loop, we emit a DEBUG_BEGIN_STMT, which maps to DWARF:
is_stmt
'A boolean indicating that the current instruction is a recommended breakpoint
location. A recommended breakpoint location is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Just to say I used gdb 8.2 for my investigation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
