Author: labath
Date: Fri Feb 9 01:40:03 2018
New Revision: 324722
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324722&view=rev
Log:
llgs-test: Parse and store register info recieved from lldb-server
Summary:
Right now the test client is not parsing register values correctly,
which is manifesting
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL324722: llgs-test: Parse and store register info recieved
from lldb-server (authored by labath, committed by ).
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43
Author: labath
Date: Fri Feb 9 03:37:01 2018
New Revision: 324730
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324730&view=rev
Log:
Fix some warnings in SymbolFilePDB.cpp
Modified:
lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/PDB/SymbolFilePDB.cpp
Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/PDB/
Author: davide
Date: Fri Feb 9 08:06:39 2018
New Revision: 324743
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324743&view=rev
Log:
[Testsuite] Remove leak tests, it's not useful anymore.
This only worked on MacOS, which now ships a newer version of
python without this bug. As such, we don't lea
If the default is already to use the just built clang, and an explicit path
allows you to override this, then do we need any switch at all? If the
problem is that the default doesn’t correctly handle visual studio
generator, maybe we could fix that instead?
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 9:43 PM Stiliyana
aprantl updated this revision to Diff 133636.
aprantl added a comment.
Herald added subscribers: hintonda, mgorny.
Address most review feedback.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099
Files:
include/lldb/Target/Target.h
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbtest.py
source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/C
aprantl added inline comments.
Comment at:
source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/ClangModulesDeclVendor.cpp:595-601
+if (Path.empty()) {
+ // This code is copied from the Clang driver.
+ const bool erased_on_reboot = false;
+ llvm::sys::path::system_temp_direc
aprantl added inline comments.
Comment at: source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/CMakeLists.txt:26
clangCodeGen
+clangDriver
clangEdit
I checked and this does not affects LLDB's binary size in any measurable way.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099
davide accepted this revision.
davide added a comment.
LGTM modulo minor.
Comment at: source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/CMakeLists.txt:26
clangCodeGen
+clangDriver
clangEdit
aprantl wrote:
> I checked and this does not affects LLDB's binary si
jingham accepted this revision.
jingham added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
This looks fine to me.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/
aprantl added inline comments.
Comment at: source/Target/Target.cpp:3949
+ idx);
+ assert(option_value);
+ return option_value->GetCurrentValue();
davide wrote:
> add an assertion message if you don'
davide added inline comments.
Comment at: source/Target/Target.cpp:3949
+ idx);
+ assert(option_value);
+ return option_value->GetCurrentValue();
aprantl wrote:
> davide wrote:
> > add an assertion m
jingham added a comment.
I don't think there's any battle. I wouldn't mind moving the command parsing
code into llvm if there's a suitable replacement.
But so far as I can see llvm's command line parsing was primarily intended for
parsing args for shell tools. So it lacks features required fo
zturner added a comment.
It's probably possible to make it work, but as Jim said, there's no drop in
replacement currently. There's bits and pieces of stuff that, with a dedicated
effort, could be improved to the point of being sufficient, though.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099
__
Author: davide
Date: Fri Feb 9 11:35:07 2018
New Revision: 324768
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324768&view=rev
Log:
[lldb-mi] This test now passes consistently, unXFAIL it.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-mi/syntax/TestMiSyntax.py
Modified:
l
jingham added a comment.
To me, the determinant here is whether the llvm project sees many more
interactive tools in its future. If lldb is the only one, then moving all this
functionality to llvm seems like effort better spent elsewhere. But if there
are other interactive tools in the offing
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 12:19 PM Stiliyana Stamenova <
stiliyana.stamen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, we don't need a switch unless we want to be explicit.
>
> I am not sure what you mean by "fix that instead" - the VS generator?
>
What I meant is that if the default behavior (i.e. LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILE
Author: adrian
Date: Fri Feb 9 14:08:26 2018
New Revision: 324775
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324775&view=rev
Log:
Make LLDB's clang module cache path customizable
This patch makes LLDB's clang module cache path customizable via
settings set target.clang-modules-cache-path and
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL324775: Make LLDB's clang module cache path
customizable (authored by adrian, committed by ).
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099?vs=133636&
Nice!
vedant
> On Feb 9, 2018, at 8:06 AM, Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
> wrote:
>
> Author: davide
> Date: Fri Feb 9 08:06:39 2018
> New Revision: 324743
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324743&view=rev
> Log:
> [Testsuite] Remove leak tests, it's not useful anymore.
>
Author: jmolenda
Date: Fri Feb 9 17:13:34 2018
New Revision: 324792
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324792&view=rev
Log:
Add test case for x86_64 architecture recognition in the
target.xml packet if it is included.
Added:
lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalitie
Author: jmolenda
Date: Fri Feb 9 17:57:33 2018
New Revision: 324795
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324795&view=rev
Log:
Looks like this fails when built i386 on linux bots, possible target
arch incompat with spec in file so it's rejected and the test fails.
will look into this later
22 matches
Mail list logo
