[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58566: [Reproducers] Add more logging capabilities to reproducer instrumentation

JDevlieghere updated this revision to Diff 188492. JDevlieghere added a comment. Simplify record function CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58566/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58566 Files: lldb/include/lldb/Utility/ReproducerInstrumentation.h lldb/source/Utility/Reprod

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58566: [Reproducers] Add more logging capabilities to reproducer instrumentation

JDevlieghere marked an inline comment as done. JDevlieghere added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/include/lldb/Utility/ReproducerInstrumentation.h:591 -LLDB_LOG(GetLogIfAllCategoriesSet(LIBLLDB_LOG_API), "Recording ({0}) '{1}'", +#ifndef LLDB_REPRO_INSTR_TRACE +LLDB_

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58664: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rLLDB354938: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments (authored by xiaobai, committed by ). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664?vs=188474&id=188479#toc Reposi

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354938 - [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments

Author: xiaobai Date: Tue Feb 26 16:47:39 2019 New Revision: 354938 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354938&view=rev Log: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments Summary: This behavior was originally added in rL252264 (git commit 76a7f365da) in order to be ext

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58654: Move Config.h from Host to Utility

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D58654#1410852 , @zturner wrote: > In D58654#1410817 , @JDevlieghere > wrote: > > > I'm not a fan of introducing another library for this. Without a clear > > timeline of "fixing"

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58664: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments

xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 188474. xiaobai added a comment. Rebase on master CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664 Files: source/Utility/ArchSpec.cpp unittests/Utility/ArchSpecTest.cpp Index: unittests/Utility/ArchSpec

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rLLDB354933: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment,OS,Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec (authored by xiaobai, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLDB. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354933 - [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

Author: xiaobai Date: Tue Feb 26 15:50:19 2019 New Revision: 354933 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354933&view=rev Log: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment,OS,Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec Summary: These functions should always return the opposite of the `Triple{Environm

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58699: Adapt the ObjC checker instrumentation to handle objc_msgSend with struct returns

jingham added a comment. I chose not to do it that way because I don't think it will ever be the case the msgSend_stret will NOT be a struct return convention so the test isn't relevant (and is a bit confusing) there. And we may at some point need to do some other work that depends on the flav

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58699: Adapt the ObjC checker instrumentation to handle objc_msgSend with struct returns

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Expression/IRDynamicChecks.cpp:437 break; case eMsgSend_stret: target_object = call_inst->getArgOperand(1); move up above for all architectures? Comment at: source/Expression

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58699: Adapt the ObjC checker instrumentation to handle objc_msgSend with struct returns

jingham created this revision. jingham added a reviewer: clayborg. Herald added subscribers: lldb-commits, teemperor, abidh, kristof.beyls, javed.absar. Herald added a reviewer: serge-sans-paille. Herald added a project: LLDB. The objc_object_checker instrumentation inserts a call to the checker

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Actually on re-reading the patch, we are detecting if anything wasn't set and setting it. Makes sense. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58653/new/ https://reviews.ll

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Still issues from what I see. We need to know if something was specified or not and with your change we don't know the difference between the "none" state (which is current enum

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

clayborg added a comment. In D58653#1411285 , @aprantl wrote: > @clayborg I recently ran into a similar issue and I think that perhaps adding > explicit `llvm::Triple::Any{Vendor|OS|...}` enumerators to llvm::Triple to > make this distinction explicit wo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 188457. xiaobai added a comment. Fix typo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58653/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58653 Files: include/lldb/Utility/ArchSpec.h source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ObjectFileELF.cpp source/Utility/ArchSpec.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Remove Triple{Environment, OS, Vendor}IsUnspecifiedUnknown from ArchSpec

aprantl added a comment. @clayborg I recently ran into a similar issue and I think that perhaps adding explicit `llvm::Triple::Any{Vendor|OS|...}` enumerators to llvm::Triple to make this distinction explicit would be the cleanest solution. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Allow the value 'unknown' when checking if triple components are unknown

xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 188454. xiaobai added a comment. Herald added subscribers: arichardson, emaste. Herald added a reviewer: espindola. Add more tests and rethink approach CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58653/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58653 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58167: Refactor user/group name resolving code

labath marked 2 inline comments as done. labath added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/Host/UserIDResolver.h:9 + +#ifndef LLDB_HOST_USERIDRESOLVER_H +#define LLDB_HOST_USERIDRESOLVER_H zturner wrote: > I wonder if this class should actually be in Host.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58167: Refactor user/group name resolving code

labath updated this revision to Diff 188448. labath marked an inline comment as done. labath added a comment. Move the resolver interface into Utility CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58167/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58167 Files: include/lldb/Host/HostInfoBase.h in

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

labath added a comment. In D58564#1410729 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > In D58564#1410213 , @labath wrote: > > > I am sorry that I won't have much time to review this in the next couple of > > weeks, but I don't think

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58680: [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer()

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL354922: [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer() (authored by mgorny, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: ht

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354922 - [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer()

Author: mgorny Date: Tue Feb 26 12:14:07 2019 New Revision: 354922 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354922&view=rev Log: [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer() Pass dummy '.' as format string for Timer() rather than an empty string, in order to silence gcc warnings

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58680: [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer()

mgorny added a comment. Heh, and I thought we're (NetBSD) the only ones getting it ;-). CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58680/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58680 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58680: [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer()

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Thanks for tackling this. I've been annoyed by this warning too, but I haven't gotten around to doing anything about it yet. :/ CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58680/new

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58654: Move Config.h from Host to Utility

labath added a comment. BTW, what's the reason that you have to have this split now? I understand its attractiveness from a Zen perspective, but it seems to me that at the end of the day, it doesn't have that much impact on the new code you're about to write. It seems to me you could still enfo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58350: Insert random blocks of python code with swig instead of modify-python-lldb.py

zturner accepted this revision. zturner added a comment. Also lgtm. Don't call the commit message "Insert random blocks of python code" though. Hopefully the code we're inserting is not actually random :) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58350/new/ https://reviews.llvm.o

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

jingham added a comment. I'm fine with leaving the reporting as is. This really only happens in fairly restricted situations (only hardware breakpoints) and neither way of reporting the failure seems much better to me, so we needn't over-polish it. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58350: Insert random blocks of python code with swig instead of modify-python-lldb.py

jingham added a comment. One comment seems to have wandered out of place. Comment at: scripts/lldb.swig:95 + +# == +# The modify-python-lldb.py script is responsible for post-processing this SWIG- ---

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58350: Insert random blocks of python code with swig instead of modify-python-lldb.py

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM. I don't remember why this was inserted as separate pass. Maybe we were still early on learning what SWIG could do? That was a long time ago now... CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58610: [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rLLDB354920: [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests (authored by mgorny, committed by ). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58610?vs=188399&id=188431#toc Repository:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58610: [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests

mgorny added a comment. Thank you for the review. When I find some more time, I'll try to convert this into utility function somewhere in lit. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58610/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58610 ___ lld

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354920 - [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests

Author: mgorny Date: Tue Feb 26 11:46:29 2019 New Revision: 354920 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354920&view=rev Log: [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or local platform's equivalent of it when running the 'Suite' tests. This is necessar

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58680: [lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer()

mgorny updated this revision to Diff 188430. mgorny retitled this revision from "[lldb] [unittests] Silence -Wformat-zero-length warnings in UtilityTests" to "[lldb] [unittests] Use non-empty format string for Timer()". mgorny edited the summary of this revision. mgorny added a comment. Changed

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

clayborg added a comment. In D58678#1410970 , @jingham wrote: > I have two questions about this patch. > > 1. I want some llvm expert to weigh in on whether > > m_instructions[i]->IsCall() > > always means it returns to the next instruction after the c

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58680: [lldb] [unittests] Silence -Wformat-zero-length warnings in UtilityTests

labath added a comment. Honestly, I think I'd just change the tests to use a non-zero format string. It's a silly warning, but it probably not worth bloating our cmake code because of it. I mean, it's not like the tests actually *have* to have an empty string. The string is just empty because t

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Allow the value 'unknown' when checking if triple components are unknown

xiaobai added a comment. In D58653#1410964 , @clayborg wrote: > I agree testing is good. The main things I would like to stay consistent are: > > - if any part of a triple isn't specified, we need to be able to tell so that > MergeFrom can merge in any un

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354914 - Mention predicting exception catch at throw site

Author: jingham Date: Tue Feb 26 11:18:09 2019 New Revision: 354914 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354914&view=rev Log: Mention predicting exception catch at throw site Modified: lldb/trunk/docs/status/projects.rst lldb/trunk/www/projects.html Modified: lldb/trunk/docs/stat

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

jingham added a comment. I have two questions about this patch. 1. I want some llvm expert to weigh in on whether m_instructions[i]->IsCall() always means it returns to the next instruction after the call. That seems obvious, but since this patch depends on that being true, I'd like to know t

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Allow the value 'unknown' when checking if triple components are unknown

clayborg added a comment. I would be all for adding a "none" as a valid vendor, os or environment to the llvm triple class. Then all of the unspecified unknown stuff goes away. But I am not sure how likely the LLVM community will like this change since it won't be useful for non LLDB code. CH

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Allow the value 'unknown' when checking if triple components are unknown

clayborg added a comment. In D58653#1410907 , @xiaobai wrote: > In D58653#1410593 , @clayborg wrote: > > > A "specified unknown" is when the user actually typed "unknown" in their > > triple. IIRC there is no "none

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58664: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments

xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 188417. xiaobai added a comment. More context + rebase on top of master CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664 Files: source/Utility/ArchSpec.cpp unittests/Utility/ArchSpecTest.cpp Index: unit

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

clayborg marked 2 inline comments as done. clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/Core/Disassembler.h:309 + /// It true, then fine the first branch instruction that isn't + /// a function call (a branch that calls and returns to the next + /// ins

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58664: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments

xiaobai added a comment. In D58664#1410750 , @aprantl wrote: > Could you please add more context to the diff? Something like `git diff > -U HEAD~1` works fine. Will do. It looks like the dependent diff might change significantly so I'm going to reb

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Allow the value 'unknown' when checking if triple components are unknown

xiaobai added a comment. In D58653#1410593 , @clayborg wrote: > A "specified unknown" is when the user actually typed "unknown" in their > triple. IIRC there is no "none" to specify that there is no OS, so we use > "specified unknowns" for this case. In

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

jingham added a comment. In D58678#1410861 , @zturner wrote: > > Since we are stepping over we can safely ignore these calls since they will > > return to the next instruction > > What if the call throws an exception? This patch won't change lldb's beha

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

zturner added a comment. > Since we are stepping over we can safely ignore these calls since they will > return to the next instruction What if the call throws an exception? Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58678/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58654: Move Config.h from Host to Utility

zturner added a comment. In D58654#1410817 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > I'm not a fan of introducing another library for this. Without a clear > timeline of "fixing" Host it's basically as temporary as anything else in > software development. I also think i

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

JDevlieghere added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/Core/Disassembler.h:309 + /// It true, then fine the first branch instruction that isn't + /// a function call (a branch that calls and returns to the next + /// instruction). If false, find the instructi

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58610: [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests

mgorny updated this revision to Diff 188399. mgorny edited the summary of this revision. mgorny added a comment. While working on other patches, I've noticed top-level lit.site.cfg* has SHLIBDIR which serves the same purpose as in clang. I've updated this patch to include it for Suite tests, and

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58654: Move Config.h from Host to Utility

JDevlieghere added a comment. I'm not a fan of introducing another library for this. Without a clear timeline of "fixing" Host it's basically as temporary as anything else in software development. I also think it's confusing (e,g, new files should go where?). If you really want a clean slate we

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58167: Refactor user/group name resolving code

zturner added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/Host/UserIDResolver.h:9 + +#ifndef LLDB_HOST_USERIDRESOLVER_H +#define LLDB_HOST_USERIDRESOLVER_H I wonder if this class should actually be in Host. While some specific implementation of it might be host-d

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58654: Move Config.h from Host to Utility

zturner updated this revision to Diff 188393. zturner added a comment. Moved to `System` instead of `Utility` CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58654/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58654 Files: lldb/cmake/XcodeHeaderGenerator/CMakeLists.txt lldb/cmake/modules/LLDBGenera

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58664: [Utility] Fix ArchSpec.MergeFrom to correctly merge environments

aprantl added a comment. Could you please add more context to the diff? Something like `git diff -U HEAD~1` works fine. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58664

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D58564#1410213 , @labath wrote: > I am sorry that I won't have much time to review this in the next couple of > weeks, but I don't think this is a good direction here. I don't see how this > will interact with the SB API

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58680: [lldb] [unittests] Silence -Wformat-zero-length warnings in UtilityTests

mgorny created this revision. mgorny added reviewers: labath, zturner, teemperor. mgorny added a project: LLDB. Herald added subscribers: jdoerfert, abidh. Silence zero-length format warnings in UtilityTests reported by GCC. Zero-length format strings are permitted by the standards, and are used p

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58678: Improve step over performance by not stopping at branches that are function calls and stepping into and them out of each one

clayborg created this revision. clayborg added a reviewer: jingham. Herald added a reviewer: serge-sans-paille. Herald added a project: LLDB. Currently when we single step over a source line, we run and stop at every branch in the source line range. We can reduce the number of times we stop when

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

Looks like it's green now. Thanks! On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:32 AM Tatyana Krasnukha wrote: > > This was fixed with r354890 -> > http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake/20544/ > Do you still have the issue? > > -Original Message- > From: Davide Italiano > Sent: Tuesda

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

This was fixed with r354890 -> http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake/20544/ Do you still have the issue? -Original Message- From: Davide Italiano Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 7:28 PM To: Tatyana Krasnukha Cc: lldb-commits Subject: Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

lldb: unrecognized option `--C' error: unknown or ambiguous option /Users/buildslave/jenkins/workspace/lldb-cmake/llvm/tools/lldb/lit/Minidump/dump-all.test:55:13: error: CHECKCPU: expected string not found in input this seems to be the issue. Can you give another shot at fixing this or reverting?

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

Those build didn't contain r354890 yet. -Original Message- From: Davide Italiano Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 7:05 PM To: Tatyana Krasnukha Cc: lldb-commits Subject: Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test Link to the failure: https://urldefe

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

Link to the failure: http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/job/lldb-cmake//20543/console On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:04 AM Davide Italiano wrote: > > Tatyana, this commit broke one of the bots: > > Testing Time: 315.65s > > Failing Tests (1): > LLDB :: Minidump/dump-all.test > >

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

Tatyana, this commit broke one of the bots: Testing Time: 315.65s Failing Tests (1): LLDB :: Minidump/dump-all.test Expected Passes: 1466 Unsupported Tests : 64 Unexpected Failures: 1 I'm a little confused if I look at it because it modifies heavily a test bu

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58630: [lldb] [test] Pass appropriate -L for just-built libc++

mgorny added a comment. In D58630#1410419 , @labath wrote: > Unfortunately I don't know of a substantially better way to solve. I have one > small improvement inline. Also, I take it this means running tests without a > libc++ checkout is not supported o

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354890 - Fix short options syntax in Minidump test

Author: tkrasnukha Date: Tue Feb 26 07:38:30 2019 New Revision: 354890 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354890&view=rev Log: Fix short options syntax in Minidump test Modified: lldb/trunk/lit/Minidump/dump-all.test Modified: lldb/trunk/lit/Minidump/dump-all.test URL: http://llvm

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58653: [Utility] Allow the value 'unknown' when checking if triple components are unknown

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. I seem to remember that we currently expect that there are two cases when it comes to unknowns: - specified unknowns - unspecific unknowns A "specified unknown" is when the user

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r354883 - Fix error handling in Options::Parse

Author: tkrasnukha Date: Tue Feb 26 06:50:40 2019 New Revision: 354883 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=354883&view=rev Log: Fix error handling in Options::Parse Moved `if (error.Fail())` to correct place to catch all faulty cases such as "unknown or ambiguous option" which was ignore

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58350: Insert random blocks of python code with swig instead of modify-python-lldb.py

labath added a comment. Ping. :) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58350/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58350 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58610: [lldb] [lit] Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or alike for Suite tests

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Doesn't seem particularly elegant, but it seems clang is doing the same thing, so probably best to follow suit. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58630: [lldb] [test] Pass appropriate -L for just-built libc++

labath added a comment. Unfortunately I don't know of a substantially better way to solve. I have one small improvement inline. Also, I take it this means running tests without a libc++ checkout is not supported on NetBSD. Maybe you should add netbsd to the cmake code where we print the darwin

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58566: [Reproducers] Add more logging capabilities to reproducer instrumentation

labath added a comment. The overall idea seems fine to me, though I think it would be better to keep the macros simpler by moving all of the logic into the single `Register` call. I.e. the Register function would take extra StringRef arguments, which the macros would fill out. Then you could st

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

labath added a comment. I am sorry that I won't have much time to review this in the next couple of weeks, but I don't think this is a good direction here. I don't see how this will interact with the SB API recorder, specifically with things like SBCommandInterpreter::HandleCommand, and ::Handl

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58654: Move Config.h from Host to Utility

labath added a comment. I also think it would be great to group all host-specific functionality into a common library (other than Utility, since that already has a lot of other stuff in it). I understand the desire to start with a clean slate for a new tool, so a new would-be-host folder might