m_have_line_numbers = true;
}
- /* If we have a duplicate for the previous entry then ignore the new
- entry, except, if the new entry is setting the is_stmt flag, then
- ensure the previous entry respects the new setting. */
- e = subfile->line_vector->item + subfile->line_vector->nitems - 1;
- if (e->line == line && e->pc == pc)
+ if (subfile->line_vector->nitems > 0)
{
- if (is_stmt && !e->is_stmt)
- e->is_stmt = 1;
- return;
+ /* If we have a duplicate for the previous entry then ignore the new
+ entry, except, if the new entry is setting the is_stmt flag, then
+ ensure the previous entry respects the new setting. */
+ e = subfile->line_vector->item + subfile->line_vector->nitems - 1;
+ if (e->line == line && e->pc == pc)
+ {
+ if (is_stmt && !e->is_stmt)
+ e->is_stmt = 1;
+ return;
+ }
}
- if (subfile->line_vector->nitems + 1 >= subfile->line_vector_length)
+ if (subfile->line_vector->nitems >= subfile->line_vector_length)
{
subfile->line_vector_length *= 2;
subfile->line_vector = (struct linetable *)
* sizeof (struct linetable_entry))));
}
- /* Normally, we treat lines as unsorted. But the end of sequence
- marker is special. We sort line markers at the same PC by line
- number, so end of sequence markers (which have line == 0) appear
- first. This is right if the marker ends the previous function,
- and there is no padding before the next function. But it is
- wrong if the previous line was empty and we are now marking a
- switch to a different subfile. We must leave the end of sequence
- marker at the end of this group of lines, not sort the empty line
- to after the marker. The easiest way to accomplish this is to
- delete any empty lines from our table, if they are followed by
- end of sequence markers. All we lose is the ability to set
- breakpoints at some lines which contain no instructions
- anyway. */
+ /* The end of sequence marker is special. We need to reset the
+ is_stmt flag on previous lines at the same PC, otherwise these
+ lines may cause problems since they might be at the same address
+ as the following function. For instance suppose a function calls
+ abort there is no reason to emit a ret after that point (no joke).
+ So the label may be at the same address where the following
+ function begins. A similar problem appears if a label is at the
+ same address where an inline function ends we cannot reliably tell
+ if this is considered part of the inline function or the calling
+ program or even the next inline function, so stack traces may
+ give surprising results. Expect gdb.cp/step-and-next-inline.exp
+ to fail if these lines are not modified here. */
if (line == 0 && subfile->line_vector->nitems > 0)
{
- e = subfile->line_vector->item + subfile->line_vector->nitems - 1;
- while (subfile->line_vector->nitems > 0 && e->pc == pc)
+ e = subfile->line_vector->item + subfile->line_vector->nitems;
+ do
{
e--;
- subfile->line_vector->nitems--;
+ if (e->pc != pc || e->line == 0)
+ break;
+ e->is_stmt = 0;
}
+ while (e > subfile->line_vector->item);
}
e = subfile->line_vector->item + subfile->line_vector->nitems++;