[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL369052: Stop-hooks weren't getting called on step-out. Fix that. (authored by jingham, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: htt

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

jingham added a comment. In D66241#1631426 , @clayborg wrote: > Better. Might be good to put a comment inside CalculatePublicStopInfo() > regarding why the "SetStopInfo(GetStopInfo());" is needed. Seems like you > could just remove the code from the sigh

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Better. Might be good to put a comment inside CalculatePublicStopInfo() regarding why the "SetStopInfo(GetStopInfo());" is needed. Seems like you could just remove the code from the sight

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

jingham updated this revision to Diff 215280. jingham added a comment. Does this seem clearer? We use the language of Private and Public StopInfo's in a bunch of places, even though at present that's more about "How" you get them than actual separate entities. But still, this seems like it fol

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Target/StopInfo.cpp:550 thread_sp->ResetStopInfo(); +thread_sp->SetStopInfo(thread_sp->GetStopInfo()); } jingham wrote: > clayborg wrote: > > Can you clarify what is going on here? Does th

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

jingham marked an inline comment as done. jingham added a comment. Do you think I should put more verbiage in the comment, or would this have been clear if you were actually working on the code? Comment at: source/Target/StopInfo.cpp:550 thread_sp->ResetStopInfo(); +

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Target/StopInfo.cpp:550 thread_sp->ResetStopInfo(); +thread_sp->SetStopInfo(thread_sp->GetStopInfo()); } Can you clarify what is going on here? Does this force a recalculation of the stop

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

Ah, that's just from the template test's Makefile, which I constructed by cribbing from a bunch of other tests which all did that. It probably isn't always necessary, but shouldn't do any harm either. Jim > On Aug 14, 2019, at 2:31 PM, Davide Italiano via Phabricator > wrote: > > davide ad

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

davide added inline comments. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/stop-hooks/Makefile:4 +C_SOURCES := main.c +CFLAGS_EXTRAS += -std=c99 + jingham wrote: > davide wrote: > > Forgive my ignorance, but why you need this? > That's how the dotes

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

jingham marked an inline comment as done. jingham added inline comments. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/stop-hooks/Makefile:4 +C_SOURCES := main.c +CFLAGS_EXTRAS += -std=c99 + davide wrote: > Forgive my ignorance, but why you need this

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

davide added inline comments. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/stop-hooks/Makefile:4 +C_SOURCES := main.c +CFLAGS_EXTRAS += -std=c99 + Forgive my ignorance, but why you need this? Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION h

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D66241: stop-hooks don't fire on "step-out"

jingham created this revision. jingham added a reviewer: clayborg. Herald added subscribers: lldb-commits, abidh. Herald added a project: LLDB. Step hooks were not firing when you did a "step out". This was because, when a breakpoint's PerformAction observes that the breakpoint has completed a p