There are some limitations with emitting regions in macro expansions
because we don't gather file IDs within the expansions. Fix the check
that prevents us from emitting deferred regions in expansions to make an
exception for headers, which is something we can handle.
rdar://35373009
llvm-svn: 317760
We have an assertion failure if, for example, the definition of an unused
inline function starts in one macro and ends in another. This patch fixes
the issue by finding the common ancestor of the start and end locations
of that function's body and changing the locations accordingly.
Thanks to NAKAMURA Takumi for helping with fixing the test failure on Windows.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20997
llvm-svn: 271995
We have an assertion failure if, for example, the definition of an unused
inline function starts in one macro and ends in another. This patch fixes
the issue by finding the common ancestor of the start and end locations
of that function's body and changing the locations accordingly.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20997
llvm-svn: 271969
The lexer sets the end location of macro arguments incorrectly *if*,
while merging consecutive args to fit into a single SLocEntry, it finds
args which come from different macro files.
Fix the issue by using separate SLocEntries in this situation.
This fixes a code coverage crasher (rdar://problem/26181005). Because
the lexer reported end locations for certain macro args incorrectly, we
would generate bogus coverage mappings with negative line offsets.
Reviewed-by: akyrtzi
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20401
llvm-svn: 270160
The coverage mapping generation code previously generated a large
number of redundant coverage regions and then tried to merge similar
ones back together. This then relied on some awkward heuristics to
prevent combining of regions that were importantly different but
happened to have the same count. The end result was inefficient and
hard to follow.
Now, we more carefully create the regions we actually want. This makes
it much easier to create regions at precise locations as well as
making the basic approach quite a bit easier to follow. There's still
a fair bit of complexity here dealing with included code and macro
expansions, but that's pretty hard to avoid without significantly
reducing the quality of data we provide.
I had to modify quite a few tests where the source ranges became more
precise or the old ranges seemed to be wrong anyways, and I've added
quite a few new tests since a large number of constructs didn't seem
to be tested before.
llvm-svn: 229748
This patch adds the tests for the coverage mapping generation.
Most of the tests check the mapping regions produced by
the generator, and one checks the llvm IR.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4847
llvm-svn: 215995
I reverted one of the added tests from r215261 in r215274, since it
was failing on quite a few bots. It looks like this wasn't sufficient,
as we're still getting failures on windows, like the following:
http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/ninja-x64-msvc-RA-centos6/builds/5378
I'm reverting this entire commit so the bots aren't blocked on these
failures.
This reverts commit r215261.
llvm-svn: 215278
This patch adds the tests for the coverage mapping generation.
Most of the tests check the mapping regions produced by
the generator, and one checks the llvm IR.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4793
llvm-svn: 215261
Vedant Kumar