[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316533 - Fix a compile warning on linux

2017-10-24 Thread Stephane Sezer via lldb-commits
Author: sas Date: Tue Oct 24 16:46:00 2017 New Revision: 316533 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316533&view=rev Log: Fix a compile warning on linux Can't cast directly between a pointer to function and a pointer to object. Modified: lldb/trunk/source/API/SBDebugger.cpp Modified

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316532 - Allow ObjectFilePECOFF to initialize with ARM binaries.

2017-10-24 Thread Stephane Sezer via lldb-commits
Author: sas Date: Tue Oct 24 16:40:59 2017 New Revision: 316532 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316532&view=rev Log: Allow ObjectFilePECOFF to initialize with ARM binaries. Summary: This is required to start debugging WinPhone ARM targets. Reviewers: compnerd, zturner, omjavaid Rev

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D19604: Allow ObjectFilePECOFF to initialize with ARM binaries.

2017-10-24 Thread Stephane Sezer via Phabricator via lldb-commits
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL316532: Allow ObjectFilePECOFF to initialize with ARM binaries. (authored by sas). Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D19604 Files: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/ObjectFile/PECOFF/ObjectFilePE

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316530 - [FreeBSD] Remove more dead code. NFCI.

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
Author: davide Date: Tue Oct 24 16:31:53 2017 New Revision: 316530 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316530&view=rev Log: [FreeBSD] Remove more dead code. NFCI. Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/Process/FreeBSD/ProcessFreeBSD.cpp Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/Process/FreeB

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316529 - [ExpressionParser] Garbage-collect dead code. NFCI.

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
Author: davide Date: Tue Oct 24 16:29:01 2017 New Revision: 316529 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316529&view=rev Log: [ExpressionParser] Garbage-collect dead code. NFCI. Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/ClangUtilityFunction.cpp Modified: lldb/trunk/s

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D19604: Allow ObjectFilePECOFF to initialize with ARM binaries.

2017-10-24 Thread Stephane Sezer via Phabricator via lldb-commits
sas updated this revision to Diff 120146. sas added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: kristof.beyls. Rebase. https://reviews.llvm.org/D19604 Files: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/PECOFF/ObjectFilePECOFF.cpp Index: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/PECOFF/ObjectFilePECOFF.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316527 - Remove some unused function calls from ClangUserExpression.cpp

2017-10-24 Thread Stephane Sezer via lldb-commits
Author: sas Date: Tue Oct 24 16:01:33 2017 New Revision: 316527 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316527&view=rev Log: Remove some unused function calls from ClangUserExpression.cpp Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/ClangUserExpression.cpp Modified: lldb/

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316526 - Remove some dead code from ClangExpressionDeclMap.cpp

2017-10-24 Thread Stephane Sezer via lldb-commits
Author: sas Date: Tue Oct 24 15:56:05 2017 New Revision: 316526 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316526&view=rev Log: Remove some dead code from ClangExpressionDeclMap.cpp Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/ClangExpressionDeclMap.cpp Modified: lldb/trunk/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner accepted this revision. zturner added a comment. I will ping them for some numbers and more details of their test setup. Regardless, I didn't mean to derail the code review. But, I really really want to reach a point where we can stop falling back on the "we need to be safe even in th

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Jason Molenda via Phabricator via lldb-commits
jasonmolenda added a comment. > There was a talk at cppcon a few weeks ago from someone at backtrace.io who > had some insightful metrics on debugger performance memory consumption, and > LLDB had ~2x the memory consumption of GDB. I haven't seen the paper, but my guess is that this is on linux

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Greg Clayton via Phabricator via lldb-commits
clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/Architecture/Arm/ArchitectureArm.cpp:23 + return ConstString("arm"); +} + zturner wrote: > clayborg wrote: > > zturner wrote: > > > clayborg wrote: > > > > One time at startup. No threads contending yet.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/Architecture/Arm/ArchitectureArm.cpp:23 + return ConstString("arm"); +} + clayborg wrote: > zturner wrote: > > clayborg wrote: > > > One time at startup. No threads contending yet. Asking for plug-in by

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Greg Clayton via Phabricator via lldb-commits
clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Core/PluginManager.cpp:282 + ConstString name; + std::string description; + PluginManager::ArchitectureCreateInstance create_callback; zturner wrote: > clayborg wrote: > > We need "std::string" since it owns t

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/Architecture/Arm/ArchitectureArm.cpp:23 + return ConstString("arm"); +} + clayborg wrote: > One time at startup. No threads contending yet. Asking for plug-in by name is > made fast for later. I would le

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added inline comments. Comment at: source/Core/PluginManager.cpp:281 +struct ArchitectureInstance { + ConstString name; + std::string description; zturner wrote: > labath wrote: > > clayborg wrote: > > > zturner wrote: > > > > Why do we need a `ConstStr

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Greg Clayton via Phabricator via lldb-commits
clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/Target/Target.h:1217 +const ArchSpec &GetSpec() const { return m_spec; } +Architecture *GetPlugin() const { return m_plugin_up.get(); } + zturner wrote: > Can this return a reference instead of a po

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added inline comments. Comment at: source/Core/PluginManager.cpp:281-282 +struct ArchitectureInstance { + ConstString name; + std::string description; + PluginManager::ArchitectureCreateInstance create_callback; labath wrote: > zturner wrote: > > Why d

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/Target/Target.h:1217 +const ArchSpec &GetSpec() const { return m_spec; } +Architecture *GetPlugin() const { return m_plugin_up.get(); } + zturner wrote: > Can this return a reference instead of a poin

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. I know you're doing things the way it's always been done, but I want to start questioning some long-standing practices :) So I'm not picking on you specifically, but anywhere we can migrate towards something better incrementally, I think we should do so. ===

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Greg Clayton via lldb-commits
Looks fine. We can start with this. I was thinking it would be nice to lazily populate m_plugin_up, but then we would need to add a bit to see if we already tried to look for it, so the current approach will work fine. > On Oct 24, 2017, at 1:22 PM, Pavel Labath via Phabricator > wrote: > > l

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Greg Clayton via Phabricator via lldb-commits
clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. Looks fine. We can iterate on this. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31172 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31172: Move stop info override callback code from ArchSpec into Process

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. I'm back now, and I'd like to try to push this patch to completion. After re-reading the discussion, I got the impression we have mostly reached a consensus here. A small issue remained about how to guarantee that the Architecture plugin and the ArchSpec object are in sy

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39246: Fix LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB build (pr35053)

2017-10-24 Thread Sylvestre Ledru via Phabricator via lldb-commits
sylvestre.ledru added a comment. This fixed the issue, thanks! https://reviews.llvm.org/D39246 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39215: Default to using in-tree clang for building test executables

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath updated this revision to Diff 120102. labath added a comment. This removes the LLDB_TEST_CLANG and LLDB_TEST_COMPILER settings. I've decided to keep the separate C and CXX variables because: a) that's consistent with other cmake settings b) in case of gcc, it's not easy to figure out the c

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39246: Fix LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB build (pr35053)

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath created this revision. Herald added a subscriber: mgorny. r316368 broke this build when it introduced a reference to a pthread function to the Utility module. This caused cmake to generate an incorrect link line (wrong order of libs) because it did not see the dependency from Utility to the

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
Reported https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35061 so I don't forget. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > Actually there's fewer, I think `test/testcases` is a symlink. But there's > more than one, for sure. We should standardize on the one in lldbutil.py > > On Tue, Oct

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
Actually there's fewer, I think `test/testcases` is a symlink. But there's more than one, for sure. We should standardize on the one in lldbutil.py On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM Davide Italiano wrote: > Fun fact, there are 13 implementations in tree of is_exe (and probably > which). Maybe we

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
Fun fact, there are 13 implementations in tree of is_exe (and probably which). Maybe we should try replacing all them with the one from lit? Or is there some hidden dependency I'm missing? [davide@cupiditate lldb]$ grep -R 'def is_exe' * packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/dotest.py:def is_exe(fpath):

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Pavel Labath wrote: > The breaking build is this one: < > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake/builds/14775> > > The blame email was sent (I know because I got it, as I also had a > commit in the same build). Is it possible you overlooke

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
The breaking build is this one: < http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake/builds/14775> The blame email was sent (I know because I got it, as I also had a commit in the same build). Is it possible you overlooked it? ``` def is_exe(fpath): if not os.path.exists(fpath):

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39215: Default to using in-tree clang for building test executables

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
On 24 October 2017 at 08:58, Ted Woodward via Phabricator wrote: > ted added a comment. > > We build lldb, clang and tools for Hexagon only, and call them hexagon-lldb, > hexagon-clang, etc. The test infrastructure is smart enough to pick up > hexagon-lldb-mi if we tell it to run with hexagon-ll

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-commits wrote: > I think there's something like lit.util.which(), or a similar function in > lldb test utilities. Seems like we could solve this by writing the > function: > > ``` > def is_exe(fpath): >if not os.path.exists(fpath): >

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
I think there's something like lit.util.which(), or a similar function in lldb test utilities. Seems like we could solve this by writing the function: ``` def is_exe(fpath): if not os.path.exists(fpath): fpath = lit.util.which(fpath) if not (fpath and os.path.exists(fpath)):

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
(and thanks for reverting, BTW :) On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Davide Italiano wrote: > HI, I'm a little curious of what bot this breaks. > FWIW, I don't think the bot should rely on this behaviour, and more > importantly, I haven't received any failmail. > > Thanks, > > -- > Davide _

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39199: [lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. Davide, I reverted this because it breaks the case when you just specify a filename as a compiler (with the expectation that we will look it up in the path). I think this is a good thing to have, and our buildbot was using that behavior. I like the direction this change

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
HI, I'm a little curious of what bot this breaks. FWIW, I don't think the bot should rely on this behaviour, and more importantly, I haven't received any failmail. Thanks, -- Davide ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r316451 - Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing."

2017-10-24 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Tue Oct 24 09:07:50 2017 New Revision: 316451 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=316451&view=rev Log: Revert "[lldbtests] Handle errors instead of crashing." The commit breaks the case where you specify just a filename to the compiler. Previously, it would look up t

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39215: Default to using in-tree clang for building test executables

2017-10-24 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39215#905259, @ted wrote: > We build lldb, clang and tools for Hexagon only, and call them hexagon-lldb, > hexagon-clang, etc. The test infrastructure is smart enough to pick up > hexagon-lldb-mi if we tell it to run with hexagon-lldb using

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D39215: Default to using in-tree clang for building test executables

2017-10-24 Thread Ted Woodward via Phabricator via lldb-commits
ted added a comment. We build lldb, clang and tools for Hexagon only, and call them hexagon-lldb, hexagon-clang, etc. The test infrastructure is smart enough to pick up hexagon-lldb-mi if we tell it to run with hexagon-lldb using --executable; will it be smart enough to run an in-tree hexagon-c