aprantl added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/include/lldb/Symbol/CompileUnit.h:397 std::vector<SourceModule> m_imported_modules; + /// All modules, including the current module, used directly or indirectly + /// by this compile unit. ---------------- All *Clang/Source* modules? Otherwise it sounds like lldb::Modules. ================ Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/ClangUserExpression.cpp:486 + if (!m.search_path.IsEmpty()) + m_include_directories.push_back(m.search_path); + } ---------------- std::copy_if? ================ Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/SymbolFileDWARF.cpp:933 + // Clang emits some modulemap files as module tags, so we have to + // filter them out here as they are not actual SourceModules. + if (name == "module.modulemap") ---------------- Is that a bug in Clang? Can you send me an example? ================ Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/SymbolFileDWARF.cpp:934 + // filter them out here as they are not actual SourceModules. + if (name == "module.modulemap") + continue; ---------------- That is not the only valid name for module map files, we also support module.map, module.private.modulemap and possibly more. I feel like there should be a better solution to the underlying problem. ================ Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/SymbolFileDWARF.cpp:995 + + // The first compile unit should contain all used modules. + if (module->GetNumCompileUnits() == 0) ---------------- This sounds wrong for LTO binaries, which will contain many Clang CUs in one file. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61606/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61606 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
