labath marked an inline comment as done.
labath added a comment.
Adding a bunch of people to make sure this makes sense for all object formats
(I am particularly oblivious to how COFF works). If this makes sense, I'll
implement this function in ObjectFilePECOFF and ELF to return the "image base"
and "base address" respectively.
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/Mach-O/ObjectFileMachO.cpp:1676-1677
if (is_dsym && unified_section_sp->GetFileAddress() != load_cmd.vmaddr) {
// Check to see if the module was read from memory?
- if (module_sp->GetObjectFile()->GetHeaderAddress().IsValid()) {
+ if (module_sp->GetObjectFile()->GetBaseAddress().IsValid()) {
// We have a module that is in memory and needs to have its file
----------------
This is the most dodgy usage I believe. It looks like this piece of code is
expecting to use the base ObjectFile implementation of this function, which
returns the `m_memory_addr` member. However, this will in reality call the
MachO implementation which does something completely different (and independent
of being in memory). It might be better to change this to
`GetObjectFile()->IsInMemory()`, but I have no idea how to verify that.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55422/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55422
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
