[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140615: [LLDB][LoongArch] Delete the s9 register alias definition

xen0n added a comment. BTW do we have a way of fixing the bug while preserving the alias? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140615/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140615 ___ lldb-commits maili

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139158: [LLDB][LoongArch] Make software single stepping work

xen0n added a comment. I think you can remove the example from your commit message altogether, it's giving essentially no information while making the text very lengthy. Only keeping the first paragraph should be enough. Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Instruction/CMakeLists.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D138407: [LLDB] Add LoongArch register definitions and operations

xen0n accepted this revision. xen0n added a comment. Also LGTM for the LoongArch bits. Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D138407/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D138407 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.or

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D138407: [LLDB] Add LoongArch register definitions and operations

xen0n added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/Utility/RegisterInfos_loongarch64.h:98 +DEFINE_GPR64_ALT(r20, t8, LLDB_INVALID_REGNUM), +DEFINE_GPR64_ALT(r21, u0, LLDB_INVALID_REGNUM), +DEFINE_GPR64_ALT(r22, fp, LLDB_REGNUM_GENERIC_FP), --

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D137519: [LLDB] Add LoongArch software breakpoint trap opcode

xen0n accepted this revision. xen0n added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. You removed the formatting in the commit message and added an extra space in front of the patch title, all fixed for you. The changes look good LoongArch-wise now. Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST A

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D137519: [LLDB][LoongArch] Add LoongArch software breakpoint trap code

xen0n added a comment. I think eventually the upstream Linux would gain support for hardware single-stepping, before the architecture is widely adopted (to be frank, if at all), so it's probably not necessary to mention this point in the commit message. Focus on the code changes being made righ

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D137312: [LLDB] [LoongArch] Add loongarch64 case in ComputeHostArchitectureSupport()

xen0n accepted this revision. xen0n added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Trivially correct. `CONFIG_COMPAT` isn't yet supported by upstream Linux though, but preemptively adding LoongArch here won't do any harm. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE L

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D137057: [LLDB][LoongArch] Add LoongArch ArchSpec and subtype detection

xen0n added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/include/lldb/Utility/ArchSpec.h:111 + enum LOONGARCHSubType { +eLOONGARCHSubType_unknown, Should be `LoongArch`. It's that way everywhere else in LLVM land. Comment at: lldb/source/Utility/Ar

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D136578: [LLDB] [LoongArch] Add minimal LoongArch support

xen0n added a comment. Hi, I've edited the summary and patch title for you. It's generally not necessary to add //that// much "politeness" when most of it is obvious from context (e.g. the fact that you're new face here, that there's obviously no LoongArch support in LLDB, and most of the metho