From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10912 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2010 12:58:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 10889 invoked by uid 48); 28 Mar 2010 12:58:42 -0000 Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 12:58:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100328125842.10888.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug debug/43552] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c with -flto and -fwhopr In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg02862.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-28 12:58 ------- The return statement does not have line information, even without LTO: f2 (int i, int j) { : [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 23:5] j_3 = j_1(D) + i_2(D); [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 23:5] # DEBUG j => j_3 [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 26:7] # DEBUG i1 => [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 26] i_2(D) * 2 [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 27:7] # DEBUG i2 => [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 27] i_2(D) * 3 return j_3; } (same dump with -flto). There's no line 28 in the debug information of either variant - still gdb breaks on the closing } for -O2 but on the start of f3 () for -O2 -flto. But the non-LTO variant has a line advance entry to line 29. What is missing is visible in the .expand dump - the non-LTO variant does have line number information on the function return (line 29), but the LTO variant does not. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43552