JosephTremoulet marked an inline comment as done.
JosephTremoulet added a comment.
> Fortunately, for the functionality you're testing, I don't think you really
> need the executable file, so you can just ignore the elf bit and test with a
> plain `lldb -c foo.dmp` (obviously, you won't get the backtrace that way, but
> you don't really need that here.
Ah, yeah, good point.
> here it looks like you actually want to test the case where the exception
> stream is not present (?)
If I'm reading things correctly, the exception stream is there and we get a
non-null exception record, which has a tid, but its code and flags are both
zero.
This makes me realize that the title I've put here is very misleading, I'll fix
that when I update the patch.
> If you can send me the minidump you have generated I can try to play around
> with it to see if I can make a reasonable yaml out of it.
Thanks! Will send.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/minidump/ProcessMinidump.cpp:219-237
+
+ if (arch.GetTriple().isOSLinux()) {
+
+ SetUnixSignals(UnixSignals::Create(GetArchitecture()));
+
+ if (!m_thread_list.empty() &&
+ (!m_active_exception ||
----------------
labath wrote:
> Would it be possible to move this code (except maybe the SetUnixSignals bit)
> into the `RefreshStateAfterStop` function? Would be less confusing and it
> would avoid the need for extra member variables...
Yeah, happy to. I wasn't sure what the implications of doing so would be, but
I guess for a dump file there will only ever be one stop?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68096/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68096
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
