clayborg added a comment. In D55356#1327224 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356#1327224>, @clayborg wrote:
> In D55356#1327099 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356#1327099>, @labath wrote: > > > Actually, this now causes an lldb-mi test to fail, but it's not clear to me > > if the problem is in the test, or this patch. This issue happens when > > lldb-mi is printing the "library loaded" message after a module gets added > > to a not-yet-running target. It tries to print the load address by first > > getting the base address and then converting that to a load address. > > > > Before this patch, that would always fail, because well.. ELF and PECOFF > > had this function unimplemented, and for MachO the base address was > > section-relative, and so it wasn't resolved to a load address without the > > section being loaded. However, with this patch, in the ELF (and presumably > > PECOFF) case, the load address is not section-relative and so the > > `GetLoadAddress` function happily returns the address. > > > > Is this the expected behavior here? (i.e., > > object_file->GetLoadAddress().GetLoadAddress(target) returning a valid > > value even though the target is not running) > > > Not unless someone has manually set the section load address in the test? But even if the test is setting the section load address, this won't work for anything else other than Darwin, so the test would need to be fixed, CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
