When handling 'if' statements, we crash if the condition and the consequent
branch are spanned by a single macro expansion.
The crash occurs because of a sanity 'reset' in popRegions(): if an expansion
exactly spans an entire region, we set MostRecentLocation to the start of the
expansion (its 'include location'). This ensures we don't handleFileExit()
ourselves out of the expansion before we're done processing all of the regions
within it. This is tested in test/CoverageMapping/macro-expressions.c.
This causes a problem when an expansion spans both the condition and the
consequent branch of an 'if' statement. MostRecentLocation is updated to the
start of the 'if' statement in popRegions(), so the file for the expansion
isn't exited by the time we're done handling the statement. We then crash with
'fatal: File exit not handled before popRegions'.
The fix for this is to detect these kinds of expansions, and conservatively
update MostRecentLocation to the end of expansion region containing the
conditional. I've added tests to make sure we don't have the same problem with
other kinds of statements.
rdar://problem/23630316
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16934
llvm-svn: 260129
This patch changes cc1 option -fprofile-instr-generate to an enum option
-fprofile-instrument={clang|none}. It also changes cc1 options
-fprofile-instr-generate= to -fprofile-instrument-path=.
The driver level option -fprofile-instr-generate and -fprofile-instr-generate=
remain intact. This change will pave the way to integrate new PGO
instrumentation in IR level.
Review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16730
llvm-svn: 259811
This fixes a crash when we're emitting coverage and a macro appears
between two binary conditional operators, ie, "foo ?: MACRO ?: bar",
and fixes the interaction of macros and conditional operators in
general.
llvm-svn: 235793
When tools like llvm-cov show regions, it's much easier to understand
what's happening if the condition of an if shows a counter as well as
the body.
llvm-svn: 229813
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
Vedant Kumar