labath accepted this revision.
labath added inline comments.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
================
Comment at: lldb/unittests/Target/DynamicRegisterInfoTest.cpp:203-214
+ ASSERT_REG(rax, {}, {eax, ax, ah, al});
+ ASSERT_REG(eax, {rax}, {rax, ax, ah, al});
+ ASSERT_REG(ax, {rax}, {rax, eax, ah, al});
+ ASSERT_REG(ah, {rax}, {rax, eax, ax, al});
+ ASSERT_REG(al, {rax}, {rax, eax, ax, ah});
+
+ EXPECT_EQ(m_dyninfo.SetRegisterInfo(m_regs, ArchSpec()), m_regs.size());
----------------
I don't know when this slipped through, but I think that the distinction
between these two assert blocks is too subtle -- they're testing completely
different things, so I think they deserve different names.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111489/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111489
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
