From b7020255e5573381b25d773b70dd0219bc8b06aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Blaikie Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:16:42 +0000 Subject: [llvm-dwp] Include the debug_line.dwo section This probably shouldn't be generated in the .dwo file for CUs, only for TUs, but it's in the sample .dwos (generated by clang) so dwp should reflect that. Arguably the DWP tool could be smart enough to know that the CUs shouldn't need a debug_line.dwo section and skip that even when it's legitimately generated for TUs, but that's a bit more off-book. llvm-svn: 254767 --- llvm/test/tools/llvm-dwp/X86/simple.test | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'llvm/test/tools') diff --git a/llvm/test/tools/llvm-dwp/X86/simple.test b/llvm/test/tools/llvm-dwp/X86/simple.test index 1c7b1040bd3..3c9795fbb93 100644 --- a/llvm/test/tools/llvm-dwp/X86/simple.test +++ b/llvm/test/tools/llvm-dwp/X86/simple.test @@ -45,10 +45,10 @@ CHECK: DW_TAG_formal_parameter CHECK: .debug_cu_index contents: Ensure only the relevant/contained sections are included in the table: -CHECK: Index Signature INFO ABBREV STR_OFFSETS +CHECK: Index Signature INFO ABBREV LINE STR_OFFSETS Don't bother checking the Signatures, they aren't correct yet. -CHECK: 1 [[DWOA]] [0x00000000, 0x00000029) [0x00000000, 0x00000031) [0x00000000, 0x00000010) -CHECK: 2 [[DWOB]] [0x00000029, 0x0000005e) [0x00000031, 0x00000075) [0x00000010, 0x00000024) +CHECK: 1 [[DWOA]] [0x00000000, 0x00000029) [0x00000000, 0x00000031) [0x00000000, 0x00000011) [0x00000000, 0x00000010) +CHECK: 2 [[DWOB]] [0x00000029, 0x0000005e) [0x00000031, 0x00000075) [0x00000011, 0x00000022) [0x00000010, 0x00000024) CHECK: .debug_str.dwo contents: CHECK: "clang version -- cgit v1.2.3