wallace added inline comments.
Herald added a subscriber: Michael137.
================
Comment at:
lldb/source/Plugins/Trace/intel-pt/TraceIntelPTSessionFileParser.cpp:167-170
+ // A list of known threads for the given process. When context switch
+ // data is provided, LLDB will automatically create threads for the
+ // this process whenever it finds new threads when traversing the
+ // context switches.
----------------
jj10306 wrote:
> So should this be an empty list or will the key not exist at all in the case
> that context switches are provided?
this should be an empty list. I've improved this documentaiton a bit
================
Comment at:
lldb/source/Plugins/Trace/intel-pt/TraceIntelPTSessionFileParser.cpp:212-215
+ "dontCreateThreadsFromContextSwitches"?: boolean,
+ // If this is true, then the automatic creation of threads from context
switch
+ // data is disabled, and thus only the threads provided in the
"processes.threads"
+ // section will be created.
----------------
jj10306 wrote:
> is this necessary? can't this be inferred by if the threads key isn't
> present/the list is empty?
> also, is this even being used rn? It appears to me that you always invoke
> `CreateThreadsFromContextSwitches()` if `session.cores` is present?
lol, i forgot to delete this
================
Comment at:
lldb/test/API/commands/trace/intelpt-multi-core-trace/trace_missing_threads.json:31-35
+ "threads": [
+ {
+ "tid": 3497234
+ }
+ ]
----------------
jj10306 wrote:
> shouldn't this be gone or just an empty list depending on how we want to
> implement it?
i want to here here the hybrid situation of having some explicit threads here
and others inferred
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D127001/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D127001
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
