xusheng6 wrote: > > or do we already have some infra that I can use? > > `lldb/test/API/functionalities/gdb_remote_client/TestStopPCs.py` is an > example of that infrastructure. The `threadStopInfo` is where you would > insert the swbreak hwbreak key. > > In fact, if i386 is an architecture where this correction of PC might happen > (or not) you could just extend that test. The result should be the same > whether the mock gdbserver returns "swbreak" "hwbreak" or leaves that field > out completely. > > If i386 isn't an architecture where correction would be done, you should be > able to find some other target xml stubs elsewhere in tests. I don't think > this test case is i386 specific. It can be tricky because that XML needs to > include a minimal set of registers before lldb will function, so if in doubt, > copy paste a working one. > > > By the way, do I always need some unit test change to get a PR accepted? In > > this particular case I do not see a compelling reason to add a new test, > > though if this is a LLVM development policy then I will start looking into > > it. > > Not 100% of the time but you will always have to justify why it does not have > tests, or has the sort of tests that it has. This justification is useful for > auditing code later, it also serves as a guide to anyone trying to reproduce > an old bug that has no test cases. > > https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#test-cases is written from the > llvm perspective but applies to lldb as well > https://lldb.llvm.org/resources/contributing.html#test-infrastructure. > > In this case because no one does lldb -> gdbserver testing within the llvm > project, so my worry is that this "easy fix" will get forgotten over time and > someone will remove it as dead code or forget it in a refactoring. This is > not a case of "if it has no tests it will get deleted" but it will certainly > be at higher risk. > > We have had cases like this before for example, someone fixed a bug handling > an msp430 simulator and the test for that replays the packets that it sent to > lldb so we don't have to have the actual simulator to hand.
Yes, i386 is an architecture where the PC adjustment happens, and I have tentatively added a unit test for it in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102873/commits/55f9473b8832723b96db45103bf4d5aa0b10da90 https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102873 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
