If you do a reverse step it actually should send a process resumed and a process stopped event.
> On Aug 18, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Vadim via lldb-dev <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I'm trying to reverse-step. So I think I'd need to refresh all thread states? > >> On Aug 18, 2017, at 4:50 PM, Jim Ingham <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> No, there hasn't been a need for this. >> >> What commands are you planning to send? Or equivalently, how much state are >> you expecting to change? >> >> Jim >> >>> On Aug 18, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Vadim Chugunov via lldb-dev >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> Is there any way to force lldb to refresh it's internal record of debuggee >>> process state (as if it had just received a stop event)? I want to send a >>> custom command to remote gdb process stub (via `process plugin packet >>> send`). This works, but if the command alters debuggee state, lldb won't >>> know about it. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> lldb-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
