Index: lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
===================================================================
--- lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
+++ lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
 void CodeGenFunction::EmitIfStmt(const IfStmt &S) {
   // C99 6.8.4.1: The first substatement is executed if the expression compares
   // unequal to 0.  The condition must be a scalar type.
-  LexicalScope ConditionScope(*this, S.getCond()->getSourceRange());
+  LexicalScope ConditionScope(*this, S.getSourceRange());
   RegionCounter Cnt = getPGORegionCounter(&S);
 
   if (S.getConditionVariable())
Index: test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line-if.cpp
===================================================================
--- test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line-if.cpp
+++ test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line-if.cpp
@@ -1,7 +1,12 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -g -std=c++11 -S -emit-llvm %s -o - | FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -g -fexceptions -std=c++11 -S -emit-llvm %s -o - | FileCheck %s
 // PR19864
 extern int v[2];
 int a = 0, b = 0;
+struct foo {
+  ~foo();
+  operator bool() throw();
+};
+void body();
 int main() {
 #line 100
   for (int x : v)
@@ -26,6 +31,48 @@
 
   // CHECK: br label
   // CHECK: br label {{.*}}, !dbg [[DBG2:!.*]]
+
+#line 300
+  if (foo f = foo())
+    ++b;
+  else
+    ++a;
+
+  // The dtor of 'foo' should be attributed to the last line of the if/else
+  // scope, which is the "++a" line, as confusing as that is (especially if the
+  // ++a is never executed because 'f' evaluates to true). But GDB does the
+  // right thing and skips over this (so if you step from "++b" you step outside
+  // to the line outside the else) in this case, but it does get confused by
+  // LLVM's output when exceptions are involved. See the next test case.
+
+  // CHECK: call void @_ZN3fooD1Ev{{.*}}, !dbg [[DBG3:!.*]]
+
+#line 400
+  if (foo f = foo())
+    body(); // this might throw
+
+  // GDB currently steps from the 'foo f' line to the 'body()' line, even if 'f'
+  // is false, because the call to 'f's dtor is attribute to the 'body()' line.
+  // This is the right line for it (the end of the scope) but GDB fails to skip
+  // it when 'next'ing through the code - it seems that if we reorder the output
+  // so that the EH cleanup block (that calls the dtor, with a line table entry
+  // pointing to the end of the function) comes after the normal cleanup, GDB is
+  // fine.
+  // Not sure if this is better (or easier) fixed by changing Clang's output to
+  // match GDB, or fixing GDB's "skip dtors" heuristic (if that's what's going
+  // on on the GDB side here). If this is fixed in Clang, DBG4 and 5 line
+  // numbers should be be the inverse of what's tested below (first call should
+  // be the end-of-scope call, at line 401, second call should be the EH Block
+  // that's currently attributed to the function close '}', line 404)
+
+  // CHECK: call void @_ZN3fooD1Ev{{.*}}, !dbg [[DBG4:!.*]]
+  // CHECK: call void @_ZN3fooD1Ev{{.*}}, !dbg [[DBG5:!.*]]
+
   // CHECK: [[DBG1]] = metadata !{i32 100, i32 0, metadata !{{.*}}, null}
   // CHECK: [[DBG2]] = metadata !{i32 200, i32 0, metadata !{{.*}}, null}
+  // CHECK: [[DBG3]] = metadata !{i32 303, i32 0, metadata !{{.*}}, null}
+  // CHECK: [[DBG4]] = metadata !{i32 404, i32 0, metadata !{{.*}}, null}
+  // CHECK: [[DBG5]] = metadata !{i32 401, i32 0, metadata !{{.*}}, null}
+
+#line 404
 }