justincohen added a comment. In D99944#2684280 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99944#2684280>, @jasonmolenda wrote:
> Omair, Justin, what do you think here? I don't think it's especially hard to > accept this in terms of # of bits OR a mask, and we should use the more > general internal rep in lldb. Another alternative would be "the mask should > be converted to the # of bits in addressing and stored in Process in those > terms". From a minidump/crashpad perspective, we are fine with either approach. We plan to a use a mask within the minidump format, but we can convert it to # of bits as necessary. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99944/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99944 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
