Changeset 11849


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 27, 2009, 5:01:00 PM (11 years ago)
Author:
gz
Message:

Remove old way of handling *record-pc-mapping*, as it confuses the new way when code-coverage is on

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • branches/working-0711/ccl/compiler/X86/x862.lisp

    r11836 r11849  
    25962596
    25972597(defx862 x862-with-code-note with-code-note (seg vreg xfer note form &aux val)
    2598   (when *record-pc-mapping*
    2599     (append-dll-node (setf (code-note-start-pc note) (make-vinsn-label nil)) seg))
     2598  #+gz (assert *compile-code-coverage*) ;; else how did we get here?
    26002599  (when *compile-code-coverage*
    26012600    (with-x86-local-vinsn-macros (seg)
     
    26032602      (! misc-set-immediate-c-node 0 *x862-temp0* 1)))
    26042603  (setq val (x862-form seg vreg xfer form))
    2605   (when *record-pc-mapping*
    2606     (append-dll-node (setf (code-note-end-pc note) (make-vinsn-label nil)) seg))
    26072604  val)
    26082605
     
    26102607  ;; This assumes x862-dynamic-extent-form will actually generate code.  The caller
    26112608  ;; must check for that.
    2612   (when *record-pc-mapping*
    2613     (append-dll-node (setf (code-note-start-pc note) (make-vinsn-label nil)) seg))
     2609  #+gz (assert *compile-code-coverage*) ;; else how did we get here?
    26142610  (when *compile-code-coverage*
    26152611    (with-x86-local-vinsn-macros (seg)
     
    26172613      (! misc-set-immediate-c-node 0 *x862-temp0* 1)))
    26182614  (setq val (x862-dynamic-extent-form seg curstack form))
    2619   #+debug 0 (assert (not (eq val form)))
    2620   (when *record-pc-mapping*
    2621     (append-dll-node (setf (code-note-end-pc note) (make-vinsn-label nil)) seg))
     2615  #+debug (assert (not (eq val form)))
    26222616  val)
    26232617
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.