http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346
--- Comment #3 from Michael Eager <eager at eagercon dot com> 2012-11-15 22:36:58 UTC --- Top of tree as of Oct 20, 2012. I'll update and verify. On 11/15/2012 01:42 PM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346 > > Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org > > --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-15 > 21:42:34 UTC --- > Which gcc version exactly (svn rev or date) you were using? > I can't reproduce this on x86_64-linux with current trunk and -g -O2. > <2><68>: Abbrev Number: 4 (DW_TAG_variable) > <69> DW_AT_name : (indirect string, offset: 0x74): argno > <6d> DW_AT_decl_file : 1 > <6e> DW_AT_decl_line : 4 > <6f> DW_AT_type : <0x124> > <73> DW_AT_location : 0x98(location list) > ... > 00000098 0000000000400420 0000000000400437 (DW_OP_lit1; > DW_OP_stack_value) > 00000098 0000000000400437 0000000000400483 (DW_OP_reg3 (rbx)) > 00000098 0000000000400483 0000000000400488 (DW_OP_breg3 (rbx): -1; > DW_OP_stack_value) > 00000098 0000000000400488 0000000000400491 (DW_OP_reg3 (rbx)) > 00000098 000000000040049f 00000000004004cc (DW_OP_reg3 (rbx)) > 00000098 <End of list> > > The only gap in there is in between 491 and 49f, and that is the epilogue: > 400491: 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 nopl 0x0(%rax) > 400498: 5b pop %rbx > 400499: 5d pop %rbp > 40049a: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax > 40049c: 41 5c pop %r12 > 40049e: c3 retq > 40049f: 90 nop > > I can reproduce it with r192900 though, so I bet this is a dup of PR54693 > (which after all was your testcase). >
