================
@@ -1,51 +1,63 @@
REQUIRES: target-windows, lld
RUN: %build --compiler=clang-cl --output=%t.exe %S/Inputs/UdtLayoutTest.cpp
-RUN: %lldb -b -s %S/Inputs/UdtLayoutTest.script -- %t.exe | FileCheck %s
+RUN: env LLDB_USE_NATIVE_PDB_READER=0 %lldb -b -s
%S/Inputs/UdtLayoutTest.script -- %t.exe | FileCheck %s
+RUN: env LLDB_USE_NATIVE_PDB_READER=1 %lldb -b -s
%S/Inputs/UdtLayoutTest.script -- %t.exe | FileCheck %s
-CHECK:(int) C::abc = 123
+CHECK:(int) {{(::)?}}C::abc = 123
CHECK:(List[16]) ls = {
-CHECK: [15] = {
-CHECK: Prev = nullptr
-CHECK: Next = nullptr
-CHECK: Value = {
-CHECK: B<0> = {
-CHECK: A = {
-CHECK: _u = (_u1 = '\x02', _u2 = 2, _u3 = 2)
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: _a = '\x01'
-CHECK: _b = 2
-CHECK: _c = 3
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: B<1> = {
-CHECK: A = {
-CHECK: _u = (_u1 = '\x02', _u2 = 2, _u3 = 2)
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: _a = '\x02'
-CHECK: _b = 4
-CHECK: _c = 6
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: B<2> = {
-CHECK: A = {
-CHECK: _u = (_u1 = '\x02', _u2 = 2, _u3 = 2)
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: _a = '\x03'
-CHECK: _b = 6
-CHECK: _c = 9
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: B<3> = {
-CHECK: A = {
-CHECK: _u = (_u1 = '\x02', _u2 = 2, _u3 = 2)
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: _a = '\x04'
-CHECK: _b = 8
-CHECK: _c = 12
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: A = {
-CHECK: _u = (_u1 = '\x02', _u2 = 2, _u3 = 2)
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: _x = 5
-CHECK: _y = 10
-CHECK: _z = '\x0f'
-CHECK: }
-CHECK: }
-CHECK:}
+
+CHECK: [14] = {
----------------
Michael137 wrote:
Does LLDB complain if a user requests the DIA plugin but LLDB was compiled
without DIA support? If not, I think it's worth investigating
> I could also mark the whole test as DIA-only and add a second
> udt-layout-native.test for the native plugin.
Yea I would prefer that. It would be nice if as many of the NativePDB tests
stayed in the NativePDB subdirectory as possible. That way we don't need to
worry about losing coverage when we delete the PDB plugin
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159769
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits