This reapplies the fix for PR13303 now with more justification. Based on my
execution of the GDB 7.5 test suite this results in:
expected passes: 16101 -> 20890 (+30%)
unexpected failures: 4826 -> 637 (-77%)
There are 23 checks that used to pass and now fail. They are all in
gdb.reverse. Investigating a few looks like they were accidentally passing
due to extra breakpoints being set by this bug. They're generally due to the
difference in end location between gcc and clang, the test suite is trying to
set breakpoints on the closing '}' that clang doesn't associate with any
instructions.
llvm-svn: 169304
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
updating an abstract DIE or not. If we are, then we use that. Its children will
be added on later, as well as the object pointer attribute. Otherwise, this
function may be called with a concrete DIE twice and adding the children and
object pointer attribute to it twice.
<rdar://problem/12401423&12600340>
llvm-svn: 167524
r165941: Resubmit the changes to llvm core to update the functions to
support different pointer sizes on a per address space basis.
Despite this commit log, this change primarily changed stuff outside of
VMCore, and those changes do not carry any tests for correctness (or
even plausibility), and we have consistently found questionable or flat
out incorrect cases in these changes. Most of them are probably correct,
but we need to devise a system that makes it more clear when we have
handled the address space concerns correctly, and ideally each pass that
gets updated would receive an accompanying test case that exercises that
pass specificaly w.r.t. alternate address spaces.
However, from this commit, I have retained the new C API entry points.
Those were an orthogonal change that probably should have been split
apart, but they seem entirely good.
In several places the changes were very obvious cleanups with no actual
multiple address space code added; these I have not reverted when
I spotted them.
In a few other places there were merge conflicts due to a cleaner
solution being implemented later, often not using address spaces at all.
In those cases, I've preserved the new code which isn't address space
dependent.
This is part of my ongoing effort to clean out the partial address space
code which carries high risk and low test coverage, and not likely to be
finished before the 3.2 release looms closer. Duncan and I would both
like to see the above issues addressed before we return to these
changes.
llvm-svn: 167222
a) frame setup instructions define the prologue
b) we shouldn't change our location mid-stream
Add a test to make sure that the stack adjustment stays within
the prologue.
llvm-svn: 165250
care about it being an argument variable so that we can decide
that captured block and lambda vars that don't happen to
be arguments could be an argument pointer.
Add the object pointer for one case onto the subprogram die.
rdar://12001329
llvm-svn: 164419
Add some support for dealing with an object pointer on arguments.
Part of rdar://9797999
which now supports adding the object pointer attribute to the
subprogram as it should.
llvm-svn: 163754
