[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb-dap] Rename `enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace` (PR #109521)

2024-09-21 Thread via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/jeffreytan81 approved this pull request.

LGTM

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109521
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb-dap] Rename `enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace` (PR #109521)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang created 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109521

The `enable` prefix is a filler word which adds no additional information. 
Rename the setting to `displayExtendedBacktrace`

Given that this setitng was only introduced a month ago, and that there has not 
been any release since then, I assume that usage is still rather low. As such, 
it should be fine to not provide backwards-compatibility workarounds.

>From 8b58b2ecd246d18fc3e6f24b5cf5f68184145966 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Vogelsgesang 
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2024 08:11:47 +
Subject: [PATCH] [lldb-dap] Rename `enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace`

The `enable` prefix is a filler word which adds no additional
information. Rename the setting to `displayExtendedBacktrace`

Given that this setitng was only introduced a month ago, and that there
has not been any release since then, I assume that usage is still rather
low. As such, it should be fine to not provide backwards-compatibility
workarounds.
---
 .../Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py |  4 ++--
 .../lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py  |  8 
 .../extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_extendedStackTrace.py   |  2 +-
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/DAP.cpp|  2 +-
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/DAP.h  |  2 +-
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/README.md  |  4 ++--
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/lldb-dap.cpp   | 10 +-
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/package.json   |  4 ++--
 8 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py 
b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py
index bbd701efa3a666..449af1b67d8022 100644
--- a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py
+++ b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py
@@ -778,7 +778,7 @@ def request_launch(
 runInTerminal=False,
 postRunCommands=None,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=False,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=False,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=False,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=False,
 commandEscapePrefix=None,
 customFrameFormat=None,
@@ -831,7 +831,7 @@ def request_launch(
 
 args_dict["enableAutoVariableSummaries"] = enableAutoVariableSummaries
 args_dict["enableSyntheticChildDebugging"] = 
enableSyntheticChildDebugging
-args_dict["enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace"] = 
enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace
+args_dict["displayExtendedBacktrace"] = displayExtendedBacktrace
 args_dict["commandEscapePrefix"] = commandEscapePrefix
 command_dict = {"command": "launch", "type": "request", "arguments": 
args_dict}
 response = self.send_recv(command_dict)
diff --git 
a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py 
b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py
index 7b192d62881729..7e80912be44642 100644
--- a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py
+++ b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py
@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ def launch(
 expectFailure=False,
 postRunCommands=None,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=False,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=False,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=False,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=False,
 commandEscapePrefix=None,
 customFrameFormat=None,
@@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ def cleanup():
 runInTerminal=runInTerminal,
 postRunCommands=postRunCommands,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=enableAutoVariableSummaries,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=displayExtendedBacktrace,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=enableSyntheticChildDebugging,
 commandEscapePrefix=commandEscapePrefix,
 customFrameFormat=customFrameFormat,
@@ -468,7 +468,7 @@ def build_and_launch(
 postRunCommands=None,
 lldbDAPEnv=None,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=False,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=False,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=False,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=False,
 commandEscapePrefix=None,
 customFrameFormat=None,
@@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ def build_and_launch(
 postRunCommands=postRunCommands,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=enableAutoVariableSummaries,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=enableSyntheticChildDebugging,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=displayExtendedBacktrace,
 commandEscapePrefix=commandEscapePrefix,
 customFrameFormat=customFrameFormat,
 customThreadFormat=customThreadFormat,
diff --git 
a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb-dap] Rename `enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace` (PR #109521)

2024-09-21 Thread via lldb-commits 

llvmbot wrote:




@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb

Author: Adrian Vogelsgesang (vogelsgesang)


Changes

The `enable` prefix is a filler word which adds no additional information. 
Rename the setting to `displayExtendedBacktrace`

Given that this setitng was only introduced a month ago, and that there has not 
been any release since then, I assume that usage is still rather low. As such, 
it should be fine to not provide backwards-compatibility workarounds.

---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109521.diff


8 Files Affected:

- (modified) lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py 
(+2-2) 
- (modified) 
lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py (+4-4) 
- (modified) 
lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_extendedStackTrace.py 
(+1-1) 
- (modified) lldb/tools/lldb-dap/DAP.cpp (+1-1) 
- (modified) lldb/tools/lldb-dap/DAP.h (+1-1) 
- (modified) lldb/tools/lldb-dap/README.md (+2-2) 
- (modified) lldb/tools/lldb-dap/lldb-dap.cpp (+5-5) 
- (modified) lldb/tools/lldb-dap/package.json (+2-2) 


``diff
diff --git a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py 
b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py
index bbd701efa3a666..449af1b67d8022 100644
--- a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py
+++ b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/dap_server.py
@@ -778,7 +778,7 @@ def request_launch(
 runInTerminal=False,
 postRunCommands=None,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=False,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=False,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=False,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=False,
 commandEscapePrefix=None,
 customFrameFormat=None,
@@ -831,7 +831,7 @@ def request_launch(
 
 args_dict["enableAutoVariableSummaries"] = enableAutoVariableSummaries
 args_dict["enableSyntheticChildDebugging"] = 
enableSyntheticChildDebugging
-args_dict["enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace"] = 
enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace
+args_dict["displayExtendedBacktrace"] = displayExtendedBacktrace
 args_dict["commandEscapePrefix"] = commandEscapePrefix
 command_dict = {"command": "launch", "type": "request", "arguments": 
args_dict}
 response = self.send_recv(command_dict)
diff --git 
a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py 
b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py
index 7b192d62881729..7e80912be44642 100644
--- a/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py
+++ b/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-dap/lldbdap_testcase.py
@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ def launch(
 expectFailure=False,
 postRunCommands=None,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=False,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=False,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=False,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=False,
 commandEscapePrefix=None,
 customFrameFormat=None,
@@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ def cleanup():
 runInTerminal=runInTerminal,
 postRunCommands=postRunCommands,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=enableAutoVariableSummaries,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=displayExtendedBacktrace,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=enableSyntheticChildDebugging,
 commandEscapePrefix=commandEscapePrefix,
 customFrameFormat=customFrameFormat,
@@ -468,7 +468,7 @@ def build_and_launch(
 postRunCommands=None,
 lldbDAPEnv=None,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=False,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=False,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=False,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=False,
 commandEscapePrefix=None,
 customFrameFormat=None,
@@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ def build_and_launch(
 postRunCommands=postRunCommands,
 enableAutoVariableSummaries=enableAutoVariableSummaries,
 enableSyntheticChildDebugging=enableSyntheticChildDebugging,
-enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace=enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace,
+displayExtendedBacktrace=displayExtendedBacktrace,
 commandEscapePrefix=commandEscapePrefix,
 customFrameFormat=customFrameFormat,
 customThreadFormat=customThreadFormat,
diff --git 
a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_extendedStackTrace.py 
b/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_extendedStackTrace.py
index 0cc8534daf4e94..ba35ea9e0b64e6 100644
--- 
a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_extendedStackTrace.py
+++ 
b/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/extendedStackTrace/TestDAP_extendedStackTrace.py
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ def test_stackTrace(self):
 "DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/system/introspection",
 "DYLD_INSERT_LIBRARIES=" + backtrace_recording_lib

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread A. Jiang via lldb-commits 


@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+import lldb
+from lldbsuite.test.decorators import *
+from lldbsuite.test.lldbtest import *
+from lldbsuite.test import lldbutil
+
+
+class LibCxxInternalsRecognizerTestCase(TestBase):
+NO_DEBUG_INFO_TESTCASE = True
+
+@add_test_categories(["libc++"])
+def test_frame_recognizer(self):
+"""Test that implementation details of libc++ are hidden"""
+self.build()
+(target, process, thread, bkpt) = lldbutil.run_to_source_breakpoint(
+self, "break here", lldb.SBFileSpec("main.cpp")
+)
+
+expected_parents = {
+"sort_less(int, int)": ["::sort", "test_algorithms"],
+# `std::ranges::sort` is implemented as an object of types 
`__sort`.

frederick-vs-ja wrote:

There're a large number of such customization point objects (and niebloids, 
which will be respecified as CPOs soon, see 
[P3136R0](https://wg21.link/p3136r0)) since C++20. Should we invent some 
convention to recognize them uniformly?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 


@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+import lldb
+from lldbsuite.test.decorators import *
+from lldbsuite.test.lldbtest import *
+from lldbsuite.test import lldbutil
+
+
+class LibCxxInternalsRecognizerTestCase(TestBase):
+NO_DEBUG_INFO_TESTCASE = True
+
+@add_test_categories(["libc++"])
+def test_frame_recognizer(self):
+"""Test that implementation details of libc++ are hidden"""
+self.build()
+(target, process, thread, bkpt) = lldbutil.run_to_source_breakpoint(
+self, "break here", lldb.SBFileSpec("main.cpp")
+)
+
+expected_parents = {
+"sort_less(int, int)": ["::sort", "test_algorithms"],
+# `std::ranges::sort` is implemented as an object of types 
`__sort`.

vogelsgesang wrote:

Not sure that would be necessary. With the current heuristic ("never hide a 
frame which was immediately called from user code"), the end result to the user 
is fine, despite the debug info containing the `__sort::operator()` function 
name

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb-dap] Rename `enableDisplayExtendedBacktrace` (PR #109521)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang edited 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109521
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870

>From 04daaac0eade25a439856bbb287e15860aba1dfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Vogelsgesang 
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:34:11 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details
 from stacktraces

This commit changes the libc++ frame recognizer to hide implementation
details of libc++ more aggressively. The applied heuristic is rather
straightforward: We consider every function name starting with `__` as
an implementation detail.

This works pretty neatly for `std::invoke`, `std::function`,
`std::sort`, `std::map::emplace` and many others. Also, this should
align quite nicely with libc++'s general coding convention of using the
`__` for their implementation details, thereby keeping the future
maintenance effort low.

However, it is noteworthy, that this does not work 100% in all cases:
E.g., for `std::ranges::sort`, itself is not really a function call, but
an object with an overloaded `operator()`, which means that there is no
actual call `std::ranges::sort` in the call stack.
---
 libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst | 26 ++
 .../CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp  | 27 ++
 .../cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/Makefile  |  5 ++
 .../TestLibcxxInternalsRecognizer.py  | 56 
 .../cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp  | 86 +++
 5 files changed, 181 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/Makefile
 create mode 100644 
lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/TestLibcxxInternalsRecognizer.py
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp

diff --git a/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst 
b/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
index 6659fa54f49df5..8999b4f23e91d2 100644
--- a/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
+++ b/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
@@ -346,6 +346,32 @@ Third-party Integrations
 
 Libc++ provides integration with a few third-party tools.
 
+Debugging libc++ internals in LLDB
+--
+
+LLDB hides the implementation details of libc++ by default.
+
+E.g., when setting a breakpoint in a comparator passed to ``std::sort``, the
+backtrace will read as
+
+.. code-block::
+
+  (lldb) thread backtrace
+  * thread #1, name = 'a.out', stop reason = breakpoint 3.1
+* frame #0: 0x520e a.out`my_comparator(a=1, b=8) at 
test-std-sort.cpp:6:3
+  frame #7: 0x5615 a.out`void 
std::__1::sort[abi:ne20], bool (*)(int, 
int)>(__first=(item = 8), __last=(item = 0), __comp=(a.out`my_less(int, int) at 
test-std-sort.cpp:5)) at sort.h:1003:3
+  frame #8: 0x531a a.out`main at test-std-sort.cpp:24:3
+
+Note how the caller of ``my_comparator`` is shown as ``std::sort``. Looking at
+the frame numbers, we can see that frames #1 until #6 were hidden. Those frames
+represent internal implementation details such as ``__sort4`` and similar
+utility functions.
+
+To also show those implementation details, use ``thread backtrace -u``.
+Alternatively, to disable those compact backtraces for good, use
+``frame recognizer list`` and ``frame recognizer delete`` to delete the libc++
+frame recognizer.
+
 GDB Pretty printers for libc++
 --
 
diff --git 
a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp 
b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
index faa05e8f834ea1..d0e84bdeb94f01 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ char CPPLanguageRuntime::ID = 0;
 /// A frame recognizer that is installed to hide libc++ implementation
 /// details from the backtrace.
 class LibCXXFrameRecognizer : public StackFrameRecognizer {
-  std::array m_hidden_regex;
+  std::array m_hidden_regex;
   RecognizedStackFrameSP m_hidden_frame;
 
   struct LibCXXHiddenFrame : public RecognizedStackFrame {
@@ -55,28 +55,17 @@ class LibCXXFrameRecognizer : public StackFrameRecognizer {
 public:
   LibCXXFrameRecognizer()
   : m_hidden_regex{
-// internal implementation details of std::function
+// internal implementation details in the `std::` namespace
 //std::__1::__function::__alloc_func, void ()>::operator()[abi:ne20]
 //std::__1::__function::__func, void ()>::operator()
 //std::__1::__function::__value_func::operator()[abi:ne20]() const
-RegularExpression{""
-  R"(^std::__[^:]*::)" // Namespace.
-  R"(__function::.*::operator\(\))"},
-// internal implementation details of std::function in ABI v2
 //std::__2::__function::__policy_invoker::__call_impl[abi:ne20]>
-RegularExpression{""
-  R"(^std::__[^:]*::)" // Namespace.
-

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang edited 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb-dap] Implement value locations for function pointers (PR #104589)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104589

>From a7876a20b5caa53dace056c84a1b7f1e798088f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Vogelsgesang 
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 14:53:31 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [lldb-dap] Implement value locations for function
 pointers

This commit adds `valueLocationReference` to function pointers and
function references. Thereby, users can navigate directly to the
pointed-to function from within the "variables" pane.

In general, it would be useful to also a similar location references
also to member function pointers, `std::source_location`,
`std::function`,  and many more. Doing so would require extending the
formatters to provide such a source code location.

There were two RFCs about this a while ago:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-extending-formatters-with-a-source-code-reference/68375
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-sbvalue-metadata-provider/68377/26

However, both RFCs ended without a conclusion. As such, this commit now
solve the lowest-hanging fruit, i.e. function pointers. If people find
it useful, I will revive the RFC afterwards.
---
 .../API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/Makefile |   2 +-
 .../lldb-dap/locations/TestDAP_locations.py   |  49 +++-
 lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/main.c |   5 -
 .../API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/main.cpp |  11 ++
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.cpp |  33 -
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.h   |   3 +
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/lldb-dap.cpp  | 113 +-
 7 files changed, 176 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/main.c
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/main.cpp

diff --git a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/Makefile 
b/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/Makefile
index 10495940055b63..8b20bcb050 100644
--- a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/Makefile
+++ b/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/Makefile
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
-C_SOURCES := main.c
+CXX_SOURCES := main.cpp
 
 include Makefile.rules
diff --git a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/TestDAP_locations.py 
b/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/TestDAP_locations.py
index 76d938d3908492..45f836a2fa3c39 100644
--- a/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/TestDAP_locations.py
+++ b/lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-dap/locations/TestDAP_locations.py
@@ -19,11 +19,11 @@ def test_locations(self):
 """
 program = self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")
 self.build_and_launch(program)
-source = "main.c"
+source = "main.cpp"
 self.source_path = os.path.join(os.getcwd(), source)
 self.set_source_breakpoints(
 source,
-[line_number(source, "// BREAK HERE")],
+[line_number(source, "break here")],
 )
 self.continue_to_next_stop()
 
@@ -36,5 +36,46 @@ def test_locations(self):
 locals["var1"]["declarationLocationReference"]
 )
 self.assertTrue(loc_var1["success"])
-self.assertTrue(loc_var1["body"]["source"]["path"].endswith("main.c"))
-self.assertEqual(loc_var1["body"]["line"], 2)
+
self.assertTrue(loc_var1["body"]["source"]["path"].endswith("main.cpp"))
+self.assertEqual(loc_var1["body"]["line"], 6)
+
+# func_ptr has both a declaration and a valueLocation
+self.assertIn("declarationLocationReference", 
locals["func_ptr"].keys())
+self.assertIn("valueLocationReference", locals["func_ptr"].keys())
+decl_loc_func_ptr = self.dap_server.request_locations(
+locals["func_ptr"]["declarationLocationReference"]
+)
+self.assertTrue(decl_loc_func_ptr["success"])
+self.assertTrue(
+decl_loc_func_ptr["body"]["source"]["path"].endswith("main.cpp")
+)
+self.assertEqual(decl_loc_func_ptr["body"]["line"], 7)
+val_loc_func_ptr = self.dap_server.request_locations(
+locals["func_ptr"]["valueLocationReference"]
+)
+self.assertTrue(val_loc_func_ptr["success"])
+
self.assertTrue(val_loc_func_ptr["body"]["source"]["path"].endswith("main.cpp"))
+self.assertEqual(val_loc_func_ptr["body"]["line"], 3)
+
+# func_ref has both a declaration and a valueLocation
+self.assertIn("declarationLocationReference", 
locals["func_ref"].keys())
+self.assertIn("valueLocationReference", locals["func_ref"].keys())
+decl_loc_func_ref = self.dap_server.request_locations(
+locals["func_ref"]["declarationLocationReference"]
+)
+self.assertTrue(decl_loc_func_ref["success"])
+self.assertTrue(
+decl_loc_func_ref["body"]["source"]["path"].endswith("main.cpp")
+)
+self.assertEqual(decl_loc_func_ref["body"]["line"], 8)
+val_loc_func_ref = self.dap_server.request_locations(
+locals["func_ref"]["valueLocationReference"]
+)
+s

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb] Implement basic support for reverse-continue (PR #99736)

2024-09-21 Thread Robert O'Callahan via lldb-commits 

rocallahan wrote:

@clayborg @jimingham Can I please have some love? I don't want to keep telling 
users "you should be using GDB" and I've done a significant amount of work here.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99736
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870

>From 04daaac0eade25a439856bbb287e15860aba1dfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Vogelsgesang 
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:34:11 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details
 from stacktraces

This commit changes the libc++ frame recognizer to hide implementation
details of libc++ more aggressively. The applied heuristic is rather
straightforward: We consider every function name starting with `__` as
an implementation detail.

This works pretty neatly for `std::invoke`, `std::function`,
`std::sort`, `std::map::emplace` and many others. Also, this should
align quite nicely with libc++'s general coding convention of using the
`__` for their implementation details, thereby keeping the future
maintenance effort low.

However, it is noteworthy, that this does not work 100% in all cases:
E.g., for `std::ranges::sort`, itself is not really a function call, but
an object with an overloaded `operator()`, which means that there is no
actual call `std::ranges::sort` in the call stack.
---
 libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst | 26 ++
 .../CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp  | 27 ++
 .../cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/Makefile  |  5 ++
 .../TestLibcxxInternalsRecognizer.py  | 56 
 .../cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp  | 86 +++
 5 files changed, 181 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/Makefile
 create mode 100644 
lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/TestLibcxxInternalsRecognizer.py
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp

diff --git a/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst 
b/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
index 6659fa54f49df5..8999b4f23e91d2 100644
--- a/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
+++ b/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
@@ -346,6 +346,32 @@ Third-party Integrations
 
 Libc++ provides integration with a few third-party tools.
 
+Debugging libc++ internals in LLDB
+--
+
+LLDB hides the implementation details of libc++ by default.
+
+E.g., when setting a breakpoint in a comparator passed to ``std::sort``, the
+backtrace will read as
+
+.. code-block::
+
+  (lldb) thread backtrace
+  * thread #1, name = 'a.out', stop reason = breakpoint 3.1
+* frame #0: 0x520e a.out`my_comparator(a=1, b=8) at 
test-std-sort.cpp:6:3
+  frame #7: 0x5615 a.out`void 
std::__1::sort[abi:ne20], bool (*)(int, 
int)>(__first=(item = 8), __last=(item = 0), __comp=(a.out`my_less(int, int) at 
test-std-sort.cpp:5)) at sort.h:1003:3
+  frame #8: 0x531a a.out`main at test-std-sort.cpp:24:3
+
+Note how the caller of ``my_comparator`` is shown as ``std::sort``. Looking at
+the frame numbers, we can see that frames #1 until #6 were hidden. Those frames
+represent internal implementation details such as ``__sort4`` and similar
+utility functions.
+
+To also show those implementation details, use ``thread backtrace -u``.
+Alternatively, to disable those compact backtraces for good, use
+``frame recognizer list`` and ``frame recognizer delete`` to delete the libc++
+frame recognizer.
+
 GDB Pretty printers for libc++
 --
 
diff --git 
a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp 
b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
index faa05e8f834ea1..d0e84bdeb94f01 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ char CPPLanguageRuntime::ID = 0;
 /// A frame recognizer that is installed to hide libc++ implementation
 /// details from the backtrace.
 class LibCXXFrameRecognizer : public StackFrameRecognizer {
-  std::array m_hidden_regex;
+  std::array m_hidden_regex;
   RecognizedStackFrameSP m_hidden_frame;
 
   struct LibCXXHiddenFrame : public RecognizedStackFrame {
@@ -55,28 +55,17 @@ class LibCXXFrameRecognizer : public StackFrameRecognizer {
 public:
   LibCXXFrameRecognizer()
   : m_hidden_regex{
-// internal implementation details of std::function
+// internal implementation details in the `std::` namespace
 //std::__1::__function::__alloc_func, void ()>::operator()[abi:ne20]
 //std::__1::__function::__func, void ()>::operator()
 //std::__1::__function::__value_func::operator()[abi:ne20]() const
-RegularExpression{""
-  R"(^std::__[^:]*::)" // Namespace.
-  R"(__function::.*::operator\(\))"},
-// internal implementation details of std::function in ABI v2
 //std::__2::__function::__policy_invoker::__call_impl[abi:ne20]>
-RegularExpression{""
-  R"(^std::__[^:]*::)" // Namespace.
-

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread via lldb-commits 

github-actions[bot] wrote:




:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code. 
:warning:



You can test this locally with the following command:


``bash
git-clang-format --diff 65c57066e099fe7f1357485cd6c4fb068bc82323 
d31e3c541cab88c1b7589120a6eed88c667e1191 --extensions cpp -- 
lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp 
lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
``





View the diff from clang-format here.


``diff
diff --git 
a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp 
b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
index a3fc876476..2a35182b42 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
@@ -80,18 +80,22 @@ public:
   return {};
 
 // Check if we have a regex match
-bool matches_regex = false; 
+bool matches_regex = false;
 for (RegularExpression &r : m_hidden_regex)
   if (r.Execute(sc.function->GetNameNoArguments())) {
- matches_regex = true;
- break;
+matches_regex = true;
+break;
   }
 
 if (matches_regex) {
   // Only hide this frame if the immediate caller is also within libc++.
-  lldb::StackFrameSP parent_frame = 
frame_sp->GetThread()->GetStackFrameAtIndex(frame_sp->GetFrameIndex() + 1);
-  const auto& parent_sc = 
parent_frame->GetSymbolContext(lldb::eSymbolContextFunction);
-  if 
(parent_sc.function->GetNameNoArguments().GetStringRef().starts_with("std::")) {
+  lldb::StackFrameSP parent_frame =
+  frame_sp->GetThread()->GetStackFrameAtIndex(
+  frame_sp->GetFrameIndex() + 1);
+  const auto &parent_sc =
+  parent_frame->GetSymbolContext(lldb::eSymbolContextFunction);
+  if (parent_sc.function->GetNameNoArguments().GetStringRef().starts_with(
+  "std::")) {
 return m_hidden_frame;
   }
 }

``




https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

vogelsgesang wrote:

> We really should add a "disable" to the frame recognizers

Merged #109219

> I wonder if a heuristic for the callback case could be: mark all but the 
> first libc++ entry point as an implementation detail. Would this be even more 
> aggressive? Also, the implementation of this might be a bit awkward. Not 
> sure. Wdyt?

I combined your approach with the `__`-based heuristic. I am quite happy with 
the result. It's more robust now, as can be seen by the updated test 
expectations for `ranges::sort`: The top-level 
`std::__1::ranges::__sort::operator()` is no longer hidden

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang edited 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

2024-09-21 Thread Adrian Vogelsgesang via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/vogelsgesang updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870

>From 04daaac0eade25a439856bbb287e15860aba1dfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Vogelsgesang 
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:34:11 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details
 from stacktraces

This commit changes the libc++ frame recognizer to hide implementation
details of libc++ more aggressively. The applied heuristic is rather
straightforward: We consider every function name starting with `__` as
an implementation detail.

This works pretty neatly for `std::invoke`, `std::function`,
`std::sort`, `std::map::emplace` and many others. Also, this should
align quite nicely with libc++'s general coding convention of using the
`__` for their implementation details, thereby keeping the future
maintenance effort low.

However, it is noteworthy, that this does not work 100% in all cases:
E.g., for `std::ranges::sort`, itself is not really a function call, but
an object with an overloaded `operator()`, which means that there is no
actual call `std::ranges::sort` in the call stack.
---
 libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst | 26 ++
 .../CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp  | 27 ++
 .../cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/Makefile  |  5 ++
 .../TestLibcxxInternalsRecognizer.py  | 56 
 .../cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp  | 86 +++
 5 files changed, 181 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/Makefile
 create mode 100644 
lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/TestLibcxxInternalsRecognizer.py
 create mode 100644 lldb/test/API/lang/cpp/libcxx-internals-recognizer/main.cpp

diff --git a/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst 
b/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
index 6659fa54f49df5..8999b4f23e91d2 100644
--- a/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
+++ b/libcxx/docs/UserDocumentation.rst
@@ -346,6 +346,32 @@ Third-party Integrations
 
 Libc++ provides integration with a few third-party tools.
 
+Debugging libc++ internals in LLDB
+--
+
+LLDB hides the implementation details of libc++ by default.
+
+E.g., when setting a breakpoint in a comparator passed to ``std::sort``, the
+backtrace will read as
+
+.. code-block::
+
+  (lldb) thread backtrace
+  * thread #1, name = 'a.out', stop reason = breakpoint 3.1
+* frame #0: 0x520e a.out`my_comparator(a=1, b=8) at 
test-std-sort.cpp:6:3
+  frame #7: 0x5615 a.out`void 
std::__1::sort[abi:ne20], bool (*)(int, 
int)>(__first=(item = 8), __last=(item = 0), __comp=(a.out`my_less(int, int) at 
test-std-sort.cpp:5)) at sort.h:1003:3
+  frame #8: 0x531a a.out`main at test-std-sort.cpp:24:3
+
+Note how the caller of ``my_comparator`` is shown as ``std::sort``. Looking at
+the frame numbers, we can see that frames #1 until #6 were hidden. Those frames
+represent internal implementation details such as ``__sort4`` and similar
+utility functions.
+
+To also show those implementation details, use ``thread backtrace -u``.
+Alternatively, to disable those compact backtraces for good, use
+``frame recognizer list`` and ``frame recognizer delete`` to delete the libc++
+frame recognizer.
+
 GDB Pretty printers for libc++
 --
 
diff --git 
a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp 
b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
index faa05e8f834ea1..d0e84bdeb94f01 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Plugins/LanguageRuntime/CPlusPlus/CPPLanguageRuntime.cpp
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ char CPPLanguageRuntime::ID = 0;
 /// A frame recognizer that is installed to hide libc++ implementation
 /// details from the backtrace.
 class LibCXXFrameRecognizer : public StackFrameRecognizer {
-  std::array m_hidden_regex;
+  std::array m_hidden_regex;
   RecognizedStackFrameSP m_hidden_frame;
 
   struct LibCXXHiddenFrame : public RecognizedStackFrame {
@@ -55,28 +55,17 @@ class LibCXXFrameRecognizer : public StackFrameRecognizer {
 public:
   LibCXXFrameRecognizer()
   : m_hidden_regex{
-// internal implementation details of std::function
+// internal implementation details in the `std::` namespace
 //std::__1::__function::__alloc_func, void ()>::operator()[abi:ne20]
 //std::__1::__function::__func, void ()>::operator()
 //std::__1::__function::__value_func::operator()[abi:ne20]() const
-RegularExpression{""
-  R"(^std::__[^:]*::)" // Namespace.
-  R"(__function::.*::operator\(\))"},
-// internal implementation details of std::function in ABI v2
 //std::__2::__function::__policy_invoker::__call_impl[abi:ne20]>
-RegularExpression{""
-  R"(^std::__[^:]*::)" // Namespace.
-

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb][dap] always add column field in StackFrame body (#73393) (PR #109531)

2024-09-21 Thread Gregory Ling via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/glingy closed 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109531
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb][dap] always add column field in StackFrame body (#73393) (PR #109531)

2024-09-21 Thread Gregory Ling via lldb-commits 

glingy wrote:

Created by mistake, current main works fine.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109531
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb][dap] always add column field in StackFrame body (#73393) (PR #109531)

2024-09-21 Thread Gregory Ling via lldb-commits 

https://github.com/glingy created 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109531

None

>From 1d39760e03c78d7c5ef68d947f560dc00900078d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gregory Ling <17791817+gli...@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2024 10:47:05 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Change error column response to 1 as VSCode expects

---
 lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.cpp | 8 ++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.cpp 
b/lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.cpp
index 4f9c9c01cf4b6b..b4358ff9ebd2bf 100644
--- a/lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.cpp
+++ b/lldb/tools/lldb-dap/JSONUtils.cpp
@@ -769,10 +769,14 @@ llvm::json::Value CreateStackFrame(lldb::SBFrame &frame) {
 else
   object.try_emplace("line", 0);
 auto column = line_entry.GetColumn();
-object.try_emplace("column", column);
+if (column == 0)
+  object.try_emplace("column", 1);
+else
+  object.try_emplace("column", column);
   } else {
 object.try_emplace("line", 0);
-object.try_emplace("column", 0);
+// column indices start at 1 by default, column 0 is an invalid response
+object.try_emplace("column", 1);
   }
 
   const auto pc = frame.GetPC();

___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb][dap] always add column field in StackFrame body (#73393) (PR #109531)

2024-09-21 Thread via lldb-commits 

github-actions[bot] wrote:



Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this 
page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write 
permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by 
name in a comment by using `@` followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a 
review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy 
"ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable 
time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the [LLVM GitHub User 
Guide](https://llvm.org/docs/GitHub.html).

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the [LLVM 
Discord](https://discord.com/invite/xS7Z362) or on the 
[forums](https://discourse.llvm.org/).

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109531
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits