jimingham wrote: I haven't read through your patch yet, but I wanted to comment on your last question first.
What you are pointing out there is not a flaw in the way that StopInfo's gather all the reaction logic after the lower level code decides what the correct stop reason for this stop is, but rather a fairly simple bug in the ThreadPlanStepOver logic. When control returns to it for any reason, it really should care WHY the process stopped at a particular PC. It only needs to react to having stopped there. It looks like the ThreadPlanStepOverBreakpoint is doing the right thing, so long as the PC has moved it doesn't really care how that happened. The same should be true of ThreadPlanStepOver. I think the separation of "the low level Process code says why we stopped, and sets an appropriate StopInfo" and then the StopInfo controls how the system responds to that stop has been a really useful division of labors. I don't think the bug in the execution control logic really has any bearing on this division of labors. It's just a ThreadPlan bug... https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/163695 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
