[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D52532: Pull GetSoftwareBreakpointPCOffset into base class

2018-09-30 Thread Kamil Rytarowski via Phabricator via lldb-commits
krytarowski added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52532#1250404, @labath wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52532#1246173, @krytarowski wrote: > > > I was wondering whether we want to normalize this inside the kernel and > > always advance the Program Counter.. but it's easier to mana

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D52532: Pull GetSoftwareBreakpointPCOffset into base class

2018-09-30 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL343409: Pull GetSoftwareBreakpointPCOffset into base class (authored by labath, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D52532 Files: ll

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D52532: Pull GetSoftwareBreakpointPCOffset into base class

2018-09-30 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52532#1246173, @krytarowski wrote: > I was wondering whether we want to normalize this inside the kernel and > always advance the Program Counter.. but it's easier to manage it in userland. I am generally in favour of keeping the kernel simp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D52532: Pull GetSoftwareBreakpointPCOffset into base class

2018-09-26 Thread Kamil Rytarowski via Phabricator via lldb-commits
krytarowski added a comment. I was wondering whether we want to normalize this inside the kernel and always advance the Program Counter.. but it's easier to manage it in userland. https://reviews.llvm.org/D52532 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-c

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D52532: Pull GetSoftwareBreakpointPCOffset into base class

2018-09-26 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath created this revision. labath added reviewers: krytarowski, zturner. This function encodes the knowledge of whether the PC points to the breakpoint instruction of the one following it after the breakpoint is "hit". This behavior mainly(*) depends on the architecture and not on the OS, so it