yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
> FYI, I reverted this because of problems test failures on mac:
> https://green.lab.llvm.org/job/llvm.org/view/LLDB/job/as-lldb-cmake/24395/testReport/junit/lldb-api/commands_target_auto-install-main-executable/TestAutoInstallMainExecutable_py/
>
> I'm not quite su
labath wrote:
FYI, I reverted this because of problems test failures on mac:
https://green.lab.llvm.org/job/llvm.org/view/LLDB/job/as-lldb-cmake/24395/testReport/junit/lldb-api/commands_target_auto-install-main-executable/TestAutoInstallMainExecutable_py/
I'm not quite sure what's happening, bu
labath wrote:
> > I can push the button for you if you could just update the patch
> > description to what you'd like the commit message to say (in particular, I
> > think the last paragraph is no longer correct).
> > As for cherry-picking, is this related to the lldb-server platform refactor
github-actions[bot] wrote:
@yuvald-sweet-security Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR)
merged into the LLVM Project!
Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then
tested by our [build bots](https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/). If there is a
problem
https://github.com/labath closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
> I can push the button for you if you could just update the patch description
> to what you'd like the commit message to say (in particular, I think the last
> paragraph is no longer correct).
>
> As for cherry-picking, is this related to the lldb-server platform
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
labath wrote:
I can push the button for you if you could just update the patch description to
what you'd like the commit message to say (in particular, I think the last
paragraph is no longer correct).
As for cherry-picking, is this related to the lldb-server platform refactor in
any way, or
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
https://github.com/labath approved this pull request.
Looks good, thanks for your patience.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
"""
import os
+import signal
labath wrote:
I guess this isn't used anymore.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.l
https://github.com/labath edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
> `test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server` is worth looking into.
hm, seems useful. do you think it makes sense to just modify it to run through
a symlink, e.g.
```
diff --git
a/lldb/test/API/commands/platform/launchgdbserver/TestPlatformLaunchGDBServer.py
b/ll
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
labath wrote:
I think it's a good start (thanks for helping out, David), but I don't get the
removal part. What you actually want to test that it *succeeds* in launching
the llgs persona, is it not? Wouldn't it be better to *not* remove the
lldb-server and check that the "run" command actually
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
Yea, these tests only test the `lldb` binary, as evident from lit:
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security/llvm-project/blob/main/lldb/test/API/lit.cfg.py#L247-L248
Do you know if there are any tests that run lldb-server? I couldn't find
anything by grepping the r
@@ -58,3 +59,45 @@ def test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server(self):
self.runCmd("target create {}".format(self.getBuildArtifact("a.out")))
self.expect("run", substrs=["unable to launch a GDB server on"],
error=True)
+
+@skipIfRemote
+@skipUnlessPlatf
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
@labath now that we've fixed the other issue, can you weigh in on my solution
for this one? If you don't have time and want to deal with this next week,
that's also fine, just making sure this PR didn't get forgotten
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
Should be good now
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
Wrote a test and it seems to pass CI, what do you say?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
Whoops, I copied that test and didn't read what it does at the end
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/l
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From 6f2d070facaced221295a5b0c48ccb3a41a5048d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
DavidSpickett wrote:
Given how fiddly this all is, I would duplicate the test (meaning, add another
test case to that file). Even if there is overlap, it's worth it for the added
clarity.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-comm
DavidSpickett wrote:
`test_platform_process_launch_gdb_server` is worth looking into.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commit
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
> I'm just thinking about whether there's a way to test this. You've said that
> there's a test for the scenario where lldb-server and lldb are not in the
> same directory. Which one is it? Would it be possible to use a similar
> approach to test this scenario as w
labath wrote:
Long term, I think we should have a different way to set/compute/retrieve these
paths, but locally, what you're doing is correct. lldb-server doesn't have a
way to compute the "shared library directory", nor does it have any reason to
do that, so returning an empty file spec inst
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
Solves https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/63468
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commit
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
>From a4e2c9f4fca115cc52ee69abfa584795b7102716 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuval Deutscher
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:37:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] [lldb] Use correct path for debugserver
---
ll
yuvald-sweet-security wrote:
Well, looks like the tests really do check a case where lldb and lldb-server
are not in the same directory. Should we just try both paths? maybe make
`GetShlibDir` return false if it is linked statically?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
___
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb
Author: Yuval Deutscher (yuvald-sweet-security)
Changes
Hello,
This solves an issue that arises when running lldb-server through a symlink
which is not named exactly `lldb-server`. For example, in many distros
lldb-server is packaged as e.g. `/us
github-actions[bot] wrote:
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!
This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified.
If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this
page.
If this is not working for you, it
https://github.com/yuvald-sweet-security created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131609
Hello,
This solves an issue that arises when running lldb-server through a symlink
which is not named exactly `lldb-server`. For example, in many distros
lldb-server is packaged as e.g. `/usr/lib
43 matches
Mail list logo
