labath added a comment.
I don't think this is going in a good direction TBH.
You are building another layer on top of everything, whereas I think we should
be cutting layers out. Besides the issues already pointed out (not being able
to differentiate PASS/XFAIL/SKIP, not all .py files being tes
asmith created this revision.
asmith added reviewers: rnk, zturner, lldb-commits.
Herald added subscribers: llvm-commits, JDevlieghere, aprantl.
Implement FindGlobalVariables and ParseVariableContext methods.
Compile unit information is necessary for resolving variable context, however
some PDB
JDevlieghere updated this revision to Diff 140826.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
- Add few more examples as per Davide's request.
- Add run line to the python file.
Because the `.py` suffix is currently specified in the root of the `TestSuite`
directory, we end up with a bunch of unresolved test
JDevlieghere added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45215#1055832, @aprantl wrote:
> So this is basically replacing the parallel test-driver functionality of
> dotest with lit and dotest is only used to invoke one test at a time. This
> way we (as the LLVM project) can avoid maintaining
aprantl added a comment.
So this is basically replacing the parallel test-driver functionality of dotest
with lit and dotest is only used to invoke one test at a time. This way we (as
the LLVM project) can avoid maintaining to test drivers implemented in python.
That clearly sounds like the rig
JDevlieghere added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45215#1055820, @davide wrote:
> Can you add another test or two? It's a little complicated to see what's
> going on here, but from your description, it makes sense.
> I'm not particularly worried right now to distinguish between `UNSUPP
davide added a comment.
Can you add another test or two? It's a little complicated to see what's going
on here, but from your description, it makes sense.
I'm not particularly worried right now to distinguish between `UNSUPPORTED` and
`PASS`. In practice, it doesn't matter (at least for the tran
JDevlieghere created this revision.
JDevlieghere added reviewers: davide, labath, aprantl, vsk, jasonmolenda,
jingham, friss.
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.
With `lldb-dotest` checked in, this is the next step in allowing us to run the
LLDB test suite with lit. I've converted a single
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Greg Clayton wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 2, 2018, at 10:27 AM, Davide Italiano wrote:
>>
>> Now with the correct e-mail.
>> How is this different from llvm-objdump or llvm-readobj?
>
> It was originally created for parsing .a files and getting the mod date as a
> hex num
> On Apr 2, 2018, at 10:27 AM, Davide Italiano wrote:
>
> Now with the correct e-mail.
> How is this different from llvm-objdump or llvm-readobj?
It was originally created for parsing .a files and getting the mod date as a
hex number from the BSD object info. I needed a tool that could verify
labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
I see, thanks for explaining that.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44998
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
kbaladurin added inline comments.
Herald added a reviewer: espindola.
Comment at:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/arm/breakpoint-thumb-codesection/TestBreakpointThumbCodesection.py:29
+
+self.runCmd("run")
+
labath wrote:
> Do you think there's any added
12 matches
Mail list logo
