labath wrote:

The test does look like it could be easily broken or invalidated by a change in 
how the compiler emits debug info. There probably is a better way to test this, 
but I'm not quite sure on what exactly is it that you're trying to do. Is it 
the following:
- we do an step-over, which lands us at an instruction, which happens to be the 
first instruction of an inlined function
- lldb report the location as one in the outer function (because it know we 
weren't trying to step in)
- lldb-dap takes the PC value and resolves it to a function/block on its own. 
This returns the inlined function (because the resolving function tries to be 
as accurate as possible)

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143644
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to