https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157566
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan converted_to_draft
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157498
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157498
In this commit:
9c8e71644227 [lldb] Make StackID call Fix{Code,Data} pointers (#152796)
We made StackID keep track of the CFA without any pointer metadata in it. This
is necessary when comparing two Sta
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157483
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157483
>From 668e90948beabe437ea283b84ae0ffc9ea7c4a78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 07:43:38 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb][NFC] Fix style issues with StackID
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157483
Some comments were "suffixed" to member variable declarations; these are moved
to before the variable.
Some constructors and operators were just defaulted and not necessary.
Some comments dividing the c
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan approved this pull request.
I was initially hesitant to make this a hard error, but the fact that we
already have a list of supported languages and that C is not in there makes me
more confident in erroring here. Would be curious to hear other's thoughts.
http
https://github.com/felipepiovezan approved this pull request.
I think this is fine, but that FIXME is curious. We don't support running in
non-C++ modes, so switching on `frame_lang` would only get us a more precise
C++ standard version, but do we use that?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
>From ce9c2cc6748c22ce4b0f5178b8f5e877d430 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:38:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] [lldb] Call FixUpPointer in WritePointer
felipepiovezan wrote:
I've simplified the test as suggested.
Also going to take your offer of testing/porting this on Linux :) It should
hopefully be a simple platform check inside python followed by a json update
like what we do for the triple/uuid.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/1
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
>From ce9c2cc6748c22ce4b0f5178b8f5e877d430 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:38:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] [lldb] Call FixUpPointer in WritePointer
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+int myglobal = 41;
+
+uint64_t get_high_bits(void *ptr) {
+ uint64_t mask = ~((1ULL << 48) - 1);
+ uint64_t ptrtoint = (uint64_t)ptr;
+ uint64_t high_bits = ptrtoint & mask;
felipepiovezan wrote:
my bad, I m
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+int myglobal = 41;
felipepiovezan wrote:
It is used by the python expression evaluation, but given your other comments
I'll remove it
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
_
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
>From ce9c2cc6748c22ce4b0f5178b8f5e877d430 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:38:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [lldb] Call FixUpPointer in WritePointer
felipepiovezan wrote:
Your guess is right. Enabling `log enable lldb expr`, we can see the IR
generated for `expr get_high_bits(&myglobal_json)`
```
@"_ZGVZ12$__lldb_exprPvE19$__lldb_expr_result" = internal global i8 0, align 1
; Function Attrs: convergent noinline nounwind optnone
define void
felipepiovezan wrote:
Sorry for the delay, long weekend here in the US.
Ok, I think I finally got it working, mostly? I was facing two issues: 1) `v`
gets confused by what we were doing, but `expr` doesn't; 2) Older versions of
LLDB would fail to find the symbol -- even with expr -- after `tar
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+{
+"triple": "replace me",
+"uuid": "replace me",
+"type": "executable",
+"sections": [
+{
+"name": "__DATA",
+"type": "data",
felipepiovezan wrote:
I think I need to make this test run only on
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
>From ce9c2cc6748c22ce4b0f5178b8f5e877d430 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:38:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [lldb] Call FixUpPointer in WritePointer
felipepiovezan wrote:
Added a test!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
>From ce9c2cc6748c22ce4b0f5178b8f5e877d430 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:38:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [lldb] Call FixUpPointer in WritePointer
felipepiovezan wrote:
> Also is there a store reference to memory and if so does it do its own thing
> or call store pointer?
could you elaborate? Not sure what you meant by "store reference to memory".
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
__
https://github.com/felipepiovezan commented:
the LLDB changes are ok, but I also support the need to split this; this is
touching some test files (and test names), and I dread to think if the
cross-project revert someone would need to do if we accidentally break a test.
https://github.com/llv
felipepiovezan wrote:
This seems promising!
> (lldb) target symbol add ~/symbol.json
How did you get this to work? As soon as I do this, I lose all the other
symbols in my original program, including the function I want to call
(`return_ptr` in your example).
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-pro
felipepiovezan wrote:
@DavidSpickett in a different comment, you mentioned that
> the AArch64 Linux bot has top byte ignore and pointer authentication
> available.
Do you know how to write a test targeting that architecture specifically? One
of the main challenges I have right now is that thi
https://github.com/felipepiovezan approved this pull request.
Nice find! Left one question about an unused variable, otherwise LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/155733
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://list
@@ -244,6 +266,7 @@ kern_return_t DNBArchMachARM64::GetGPRState(bool force) {
uint64_t log_sp = m_state.context.gpr.__sp;
uint64_t log_pc = m_state.context.gpr.__pc;
#endif
+uint64_t *x = &m_state.context.gpr.__x[0];
felipepiovezan wrote:
is this u
felipepiovezan wrote:
I'm out next week, but I'll have a look at that idea when I'm back!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-co
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153728
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
felipepiovezan wrote:
@bulbazord what do you think?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153258
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153728
This commits makes the docs more precise, clarifying how scopes affect the
result of a method, as well as documenting a parameter of a different method.
>From 4aa57dc057c8f2b8a1d6cff17537281a3a4b900a Mon
@@ -640,6 +640,13 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
error.Clear();
+ /// Only ask the Process to fix the address if this address belongs to the
+ /// proces
https://github.com/felipepiovezan edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
felipepiovezan wrote:
Address review comments
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
>From ce9c2cc6748c22ce4b0f5178b8f5e877d430 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:38:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [lldb] Call FixUpPointer in WritePointer
@@ -640,6 +640,13 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
felipepiovezan wrote:
I'll do this after this PR is merged, otherwise I'll have to rebase and
https://github.com/felipepiovezan edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -640,6 +640,13 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
error.Clear();
+ /// Only ask the Process to fix the address if this address belongs to the
+ /// proces
@@ -640,6 +640,13 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
error.Clear();
+ /// Only ask the Process to fix the address if this address belongs to the
+ /// proces
felipepiovezan wrote:
Thanks @jasonmolenda for suggesting a solution to the issues
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153585
In architectures where pointers may contain metadata, such as arm64e, the
metadata may need to be cleaned prior to sending this pointer to be used in
expression evaluation generated code.
This patch is
Author: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: 2025-08-12T18:51:00-07:00
New Revision: a2035464960a71c1297aa6f81f9bdc7606c8f515
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a2035464960a71c1297aa6f81f9bdc7606c8f515
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a2035464960a71c1297aa6f81f9bdc760
felipepiovezan wrote:
I believe @adrian-prantl merged this by mistake.
Feel free to continue the discussion here and I'll address the points in a
follow up, or just revert and repost.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
___
lldb-commits m
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152798
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -640,6 +640,9 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
error.Clear();
+ if (auto process_sp = GetProcessWP().lock())
+address = process_sp->FixAnyAddress(add
felipepiovezan wrote:
> Maybe a Doxygen comment explaining why you get the API lock back but not the
> stop lock would address your concerns?
This is exactly how this started, actually. I felt like I should document why
we get one lock back but not the other, and explain why such a method is
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152796
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
felipepiovezan wrote:
I was thinking a bit more about the `Destroy` method, which I was not too too
happy with, and thought about just changing it to be a "Resume" method.
Something like the below, what do you think?
```
diff --git a/lldb/include/lldb/Target/ExecutionContext.h
b/lldb/include/l
@@ -71,7 +72,7 @@ StackFrame::StackFrame(const ThreadSP &thread_sp, user_id_t
frame_idx,
// recursive functions properly aren't confused with one another on a history
// stack.
if (IsHistorical() && !m_cfa_is_valid) {
-m_id.SetCFA(m_frame_index);
+m_id.SetCFA(m_f
@@ -640,6 +640,9 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
error.Clear();
+ if (auto process_sp = GetProcessWP().lock())
+address = process_sp->FixAnyAddress(add
@@ -640,6 +640,9 @@ void IRMemoryMap::WritePointerToMemory(lldb::addr_t
process_address,
lldb::addr_t address, Status &error) {
error.Clear();
+ if (auto process_sp = GetProcessWP().lock())
+address = process_sp->FixAnyAddress(add
felipepiovezan wrote:
> Your idea sounds fine, no idea if any of these are load bearing but test
> suites are the only way to find out. If Mac is fine go ahead and land this,
> the AArch64 Linux bot has top byte ignore and pointer authentication
> available.
Somehow I missed this comment, oth
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152798
In architectures where pointers may contain metadata, such as arm64e, the
metadata may need to be cleaned prior to sending this pointer to be used in
expression evaluation generated code.
This patch is
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152796
In architectures where pointers may contain metadata, such as arm64e, it is
important to ignore those bits when comparing two different StackIDs, as the
metadata may not be the same even if the pointers
@@ -125,19 +127,48 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
-: m_target_sp(), m_proc
@@ -125,19 +127,48 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
-: m_target_sp(), m_proc
felipepiovezan wrote:
Ok, renamed the class and moved logging to the call sites (did this in two
commits, because I had forgotten about one of the files...)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@li
@@ -566,6 +559,53 @@ class ExecutionContext {
lldb::StackFrameSP m_frame_sp; ///< The stack frame in thread.
};
+/// A wrapper class representing an execution context with non-null Target
+/// and Process pointers, a locked API mutex and a locked ProcessRunLock.
+/// The loc
@@ -566,6 +559,53 @@ class ExecutionContext {
lldb::StackFrameSP m_frame_sp; ///< The stack frame in thread.
};
+/// A wrapper class representing an execution context with non-null Target
+/// and Process pointers, a locked API mutex and a locked ProcessRunLock.
+/// The loc
felipepiovezan wrote:
@jimingham @JDevlieghere With the latest commit, I created the new factory
method and employed it throughout. It might be better to just check the last
commit's diff.
The main change is in the `ExecutionContext` files, but all SBMethods have
diffs. Since I had to updat
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
https://github.com/felipepiovezan deleted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152054
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
https://github.com/felipepiovezan edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -125,19 +126,43 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
+ExecutionContext::Execution
https://github.com/felipepiovezan edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -125,19 +126,43 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
+ExecutionContext::Execution
@@ -125,19 +126,43 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
+ExecutionContext::Execution
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
@@ -755,11 +755,237 @@ size_t ModuleList::GetIndexForModule(const Module
*module) const {
}
namespace {
+/// A wrapper around ModuleList for shared modules. Provides fast lookups for
+/// file-based ModuleSpec queries.
+class SharedModuleList {
+public:
+ /// Finds all the m
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
>From 9be92f8ead1294cc1931fe68c13dbaa8c5945423 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 08:32:20 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [lldb] Guard SBFrame/SBThread methods aga
@@ -981,7 +1018,10 @@ SBError SBThread::UnwindInnermostExpression() {
SBError sb_error;
std::unique_lock lock;
- ExecutionContext exe_ctx(m_opaque_sp.get(), lock);
+ Process::StopLocker stop_locker;
+ ExecutionContext exe_ctx(m_opaque_sp.get(), lock, stop_locker);
+ if
@@ -125,17 +125,21 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
+ExecutionContext::Execution
@@ -782,27 +809,26 @@ SBValueList SBFrame::GetVariables(const
lldb::SBVariablesOptions &options) {
SBValueList value_list;
std::unique_lock lock;
- ExecutionContext exe_ctx(m_opaque_sp.get(), lock);
+ Process::StopLocker stop_locker;
felipepiovezan wrot
@@ -139,19 +140,19 @@ SBModule SBFrame::GetModule() const {
SBModule sb_module;
ModuleSP module_sp;
std::unique_lock lock;
- ExecutionContext exe_ctx(m_opaque_sp.get(), lock);
+ Process::StopLocker stop_locker;
+ ExecutionContext exe_ctx(m_opaque_sp.get(), lock, stop_l
@@ -125,17 +125,21 @@ ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const
ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
}
}
-ExecutionContext::ExecutionContext(const ExecutionContextRef *exe_ctx_ref_ptr,
- std::unique_lock
&lock)
+ExecutionContext::Execution
felipepiovezan wrote:
I think I've addressed the vast majority of comments here.
@jimingham I may have added "error messages" at a finer granularity than what
you were expecting in the constructor. Were you thinking of limiting it to
_only_ when we had a process and it was not stopped? If so,
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
>From 9be92f8ead1294cc1931fe68c13dbaa8c5945423 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 08:32:20 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Guard SBFrame/SBThread methods aga
felipepiovezan wrote:
This linux test failed, but I'm not yet sure if it is related, as it doesn't
fail locally for me:
```
2025-08-04T21:05:44.7103932Z File
"/home/gha/actions-runner/_work/llvm-project/llvm-project/lldb/test/API/python_api/default-constructor/TestDefaultConstructorForAPIObje
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
>From 9be92f8ead1294cc1931fe68c13dbaa8c5945423 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 08:32:20 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [lldb] Guard SBFrame/SBThread methods against
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152020
Prior to this patch, SBFrame/SBThread methods exhibit racy behavior if called
while the process is running, because they do not lock the
`Process::RetRunLock` mutex. If they did, they would fail, correct
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151988
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151987
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151988
This *private* method is only defined as a member class of SBThread so that it
may be declared a `friend` of SBError and access a private constructor of
SBError that takes a `Status`, which is an `lldb_p
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151987
The ctor that takes a reference to ExecutionContextRef can be implemented in
terms of the ctor that takes a pointer to that object, removing code
duplication.
>From c831152b699e1c4e4f6331a1feff356d7627c
https://github.com/felipepiovezan created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151767
The method ConvertRegisterKindToRegisterNumber should return INVALID_REGNUM,
and not "false" upon failure: false would mean 0 which is usually the number
for generic PC.
Likewise, NumSupportedHardwareB
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151208
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/felipepiovezan approved this pull request.
This LGTM! When I was working on the accelerator tables in the past, this API
really bothered me, so I'll be happy to see it changed!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151489
___
ll
felipepiovezan wrote:
> 1. Do we need to unset the Currently Selected Frame, we've almost surely
> invalidated it, and even if it does happen to accidentally still exist, it
> might mean something different. This almost seems like something
> ClearStackFrames should do.
Based on the implemen
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128724
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -581,19 +581,19 @@ llvm::json::Value CreateStackFrame(lldb::SBFrame &frame,
EmplaceSafeString(object, "name", frame_name);
- auto target = frame.GetThread().GetProcess().GetTarget();
- auto source = CreateSource(frame.GetPCAddress(), target);
+ lldb::SBTarget target =
https://github.com/felipepiovezan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143572
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -581,19 +581,19 @@ llvm::json::Value CreateStackFrame(lldb::SBFrame &frame,
EmplaceSafeString(object, "name", frame_name);
- auto target = frame.GetThread().GetProcess().GetTarget();
- auto source = CreateSource(frame.GetPCAddress(), target);
felipepio
@@ -581,19 +581,19 @@ llvm::json::Value CreateStackFrame(lldb::SBFrame &frame,
EmplaceSafeString(object, "name", frame_name);
- auto target = frame.GetThread().GetProcess().GetTarget();
- auto source = CreateSource(frame.GetPCAddress(), target);
+ lldb::SBTarget target =
https://github.com/felipepiovezan updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143572
>From 9821fd7c4530819f131271f4325123a400ecded4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Felipe de Azevedo Piovezan
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:26:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [lldb][nfc] Factor out code checking if
1 - 100 of 652 matches
Mail list logo
