expand the test case to test out more stuff

git-svn-id: https://smali.googlecode.com/svn/trunk@457 55b6fa8a-2a1e-11de-a435-ffa8d773f76a

baksmali/src/test/smali/deodex_test1/main.smali

@@ -5,40 +5,70 @@
 .method public static main([Ljava/lang/String;)V
     .registers 3
 
-    const v2, 0
+    here4:
+    const v0, 0
+
+    here3:
+
+    new-instance v2, Lsuperclass;
+    invoke-direct {v2}, Lsuperclass;-><init>()V
+
+    if-eqz v0, here2:
 
 
-    new-instance v0, Lsubclass;
+    #this is the unresolvable instruction. v0 is always null,
-    invoke-direct {v0}, Lsubclass;-><init>()V
+    #and this will always throw an exception. Everything below
+    #here, until the here2: label is dead code, and should be
+    #commented out. This instruction itself should be be replaced
+    #with a call to Ljava/lang/Object;->hashCode()I, followed
+    #by a goto/32 0, which is just there to prevent dexopt from
+    #thinking that execution will fall off the end of the method
+    #i.e. if all the code following this was dead (and thus commented
+    #out)
+    invoke-virtual {v0}, Lrandomclass;->getSuperclass()Lsuperclass;
+    move-result-object v1
 
-    invoke-virtual {v0}, Lsubclass;->somemethod()V
+    
+    #a branch to outside the dead code. The branch label should not
+    #be commented out, because there is a non-dead instruction
+    #that branches to it
+    if-eqz v0, here2:
 
-    goto here2:
+    
+    #a branch to inside the dead code. the branch label should be
+    #commented out
+    if-eqz v0, here:
+
+    #another branch to outside the dead code. In this case, the "dead"
+    #instruction is the first instruction that references the label.
+    #the label should not be commented out, because it is referenced
+    #be a non-dead instruction
+    if-eqz v0, here3:
+
+    #one more branch to out the dead code. the branch label should be
+    #commented out, because there are no other non-dead instructions
+    #referenceding it
+    if-eqz v0, here4:
+
+    #another odexed instruction that uses the result of the
+    #first unresolveable odex instruction. this should
+    #appear as a commented invoke-virtual-quick instruction
+    invoke-virtual {v1}, Lsuperclass;->somemethod()V
 
     here:
-    const v2, 1
 
+    #a resolveable odex instruction in the dead code. It should be resolved,
+    #but still commented out
+    invoke-virtual {v2}, Lsuperclass;->somemethod()V
+
+    
     here2:
 
-    #this instruction is tricky for the deodexer, because once everything gets
+    #and we're back to the non-dead code
-    #odexed, then static inspection shows the type of v0 to be Lsubclass;
+    invoke-virtual {v2}, Lsuperclass;->somemethod()V
-    #from the above new-instance instruction.
+
-    #so the first pass at deodexing this instruction will incorrectly resolve it
+    if-nez v0, here3:
-    #to Lsubclass->somemethod()V
-    #It's not until the following invoke-virtual call to
-    #Lrandomclass;->getSuperclass()Lsuperclass is deodexed that it will be able to
-    #determine that the type of v0 is actually Lsuperclass;, and not Lsubclass;, and
-    #so it has to be re-deodexed when it discovers the new register type information
-    invoke-virtual {v0}, Lsuperclass;->somemethod()V
     
 
-    new-instance v1, Lrandomclass;
-    invoke-direct {v1}, Lrandomclass;-><init>()V
-
-    invoke-virtual {v1}, Lrandomclass;->getSuperclass()Lsuperclass;
-    move-result-object v0
-
-    if-eqz v2, here:
-
     return-void
 .end method