lemo added a comment.
Thanks Greg, looks good to me (a couple of inline comments left at your
discretion)
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/minidump/ProcessMinidump.cpp:15
// Other libraries and framework includes
+//#include "lldb/Core/Architecture.h"
#include "lldb/Core/Module.h"
----------------
it this set for removal?
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/minidump/RegisterContextMinidump_ARM.cpp:195
+// ARM general purpose registers.
+const uint32_t g_gpr_regnums[] = {
+ reg_r0, reg_r1, reg_r2, reg_r3, reg_r4, reg_r5, reg_r6, reg_r7,
----------------
clayborg wrote:
> lemo wrote:
> > use std::array for these kind of static arrays? (debug bounds checks, easy
> > access to the static size, ...)
> Tried it but it introduces a global constructor. We try to avoid those.
We shouldn't have a dynamic initializer: that's strange, if that's the case we
have a compiler bug on our hands. A quick experiment indicates that even with
-O0 recent clang/llvm do the right thing: https://godbolt.org/g/NMUFLP
Is the problem only with arrays of RegisterInfo structs? If that's the case the
cause is RegisterInfo itself and std::array should not make a difference (ie.
we'd see the dynamic initializer even with plain C arrays)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D49750
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
