[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

clayborg added a comment. needs a test, but looks good. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48801 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48752: Quiet command regex instructions during batch execution

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Commands/CommandObjectCommands.cpp:1012 void IOHandlerActivated(IOHandler &io_handler) override { +if (!io_handler.GetIsInteractive() && !io_handler.GetIsRealTerminal()) + // Don't print instructions during batch exec

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48802: [lldb-mi] Re-implement symbol-list-lines command.

aprantl accepted this revision. aprantl added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM with the inline keyword removed. Comment at: tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdSymbol.cpp:24 +namespace { +inline const CMICmnMIValueTuple +CreateMITuplePCLine(const uint32_t addr

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r335956 - Fix TestLoadUsingPaths on linux

Thanks for fixing this. Jim > On Jun 29, 2018, at 2:22 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-commits > wrote: > > Author: labath > Date: Fri Jun 29 02:22:07 2018 > New Revision: 335956 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=335956&view=rev > Log: > Fix TestLoadUsingPaths on linux > > we need t

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48752: Quiet command regex instructions during batch execution

Sure, that also sounds fine. Jim > On Jun 29, 2018, at 11:55 AM, Dave Lee via Phabricator > wrote: > > kastiglione added a comment. > > Thanks @jingham. > >> if the `IOHandlerDelegate` could say whether it wants to be notified for >> `IOHandlerActivated` when non-interactive (like have a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48752: Quiet command regex instructions during batch execution

jingham added a subscriber: kastiglione. jingham added a comment. Sure, that also sounds fine. Jim https://reviews.llvm.org/D48752 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48465: Added initial code completion support for the `expr` command

teemperor updated this revision to Diff 153748. teemperor marked 13 inline comments as done. teemperor added a comment. - Addresses the problems pointed out by Adrian and Pavel (Thanks!) - Now using the completion API patch to get rid of the code that rebuilds the command line string from the arg

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48465: Added initial code completion support for the `expr` command

teemperor added inline comments. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/expr_completion/TestExprCompletion.py:177-215 +def generate_random_expr(self, run_index): +""" +Generates a random expression. run_index seeds the rng, so +the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48796: Refactoring for for the internal command line completion API (NFC)

labath added a comment. Thank you for working on this. Overall, I like the direction this is going, but I'm OOO this week and the next one, so I'll defer to other reviewers on this one. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48796 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48465: Added initial code completion support for the `expr` command

teemperor planned changes to this revision. teemperor added a comment. Actually, because both @labath and @jingham requested refactoring to get rid of the `--` search (even though Phabricator couldn't parse Jim's comment), I'll first also refactor this one. Thanks for the feedback! https://rev

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48782: LLDB Test Suite: Provide an Option to run all tests with Dwarf Package Format (DWP).

labath added a subscriber: jankratochvil. labath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D48782#1149051, @plotfi wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D48782#1148498, @alexshap wrote: > > > @labath > > > > > I am not denying that there is value in running the dotest suite in all > > > of the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48520: [lldb-mi] Re-implement a few MI commands.

apolyakov added a comment. Update comment. It still needs a review, thanks for your time. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48520 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48796: Refactoring for for the internal command line completion API (NFC)

jingham added a comment. This patch looks fine, I agree with Pavel the direction is good. It seems like you would reduce a bunch of boiler-plate if you changed over InvokeCommonCompletionCallbacks to take a CompletionRequest. Was there something that blocked you from doing that? https://rev

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48520: [lldb-mi] Re-implement a few MI commands.

clayborg added a comment. Just waiting for Adrian to indicate he is happy with testing stuff. LGTM https://reviews.llvm.org/D48520 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48796: Refactoring for for the internal command line completion API (NFC)

teemperor added a comment. @jingham Just trying to keep this patch as minimal/NFC as possible because we can't revert it once the expr completion patch is merged. I'll open reviews for all these other refactorings once this is in. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48796

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48796: Refactoring for for the internal command line completion API (NFC)

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Okay, sounds reasonable. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48796 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48796: Refactoring for for the internal command line completion API (NFC)

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL336146: Refactoring for for the internal command line completion API (NFC) (authored by teemperor, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r336147 - [lldbsuite, windows] Don't crash LLDB when we try to retrieve a register on Windows

Author: stella.stamenova Date: Mon Jul 2 14:50:31 2018 New Revision: 336147 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=336147&view=rev Log: [lldbsuite, windows] Don't crash LLDB when we try to retrieve a register on Windows Summary: 1) When ReadRegister is called with a null register into on

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48855: Fixed compilation failure after the code completion refactor patch

teemperor created this revision. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48855 Files: include/lldb/Interpreter/CommandObject.h include/lldb/Utility/CompletionRequest.h Index: include/lldb/Utility/CompletionRequest.h === --- include/lldb/Util

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48855: Fixed compilation failure after the code completion refactor patch

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL336149: Fixed compilation failure after the code completion refactor patch (authored by teemperor, committed by ). Herald

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

apolyakov updated this revision to Diff 153817. apolyakov added a comment. Added documentation and tests. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48801 Files: include/lldb/API/SBModule.h include/lldb/API/SBTarget.h packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/python_api/module_section/TestModuleAndSection.py pack

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48802: [lldb-mi] Re-implement symbol-list-lines command.

apolyakov updated this revision to Diff 153818. apolyakov added a comment. Removed `inline` keyword. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48802 Files: lit/tools/lldb-mi/symbol/inputs/list-lines-helper.c lit/tools/lldb-mi/symbol/inputs/list-lines-helper.h lit/tools/lldb-mi/symbol/inputs/main.c lit/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

aprantl accepted this revision. aprantl added inline comments. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Comment at: include/lldb/API/SBModule.h:136 + /// + /// @param[in] sb_file_spec + /// A lldb::SBFileSpec object that contains source file We typ

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

apolyakov added inline comments. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/python_api/target/TestTargetAPI.py:54 +self.setTearDownCleanup(dictionary=d) +self.find_compile_units('b.out') + aprantl wrote: > shouldn't this be `self.getBuildArtifact(

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

apolyakov added inline comments. Comment at: include/lldb/API/SBModule.h:136 + /// + /// @param[in] sb_file_spec + /// A lldb::SBFileSpec object that contains source file aprantl wrote: > We typically use `\param` instead of `@param` in LLVM. I did it like

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

jingham added a comment. Alex is right, lldb uses @param everywhere. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48801 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

aprantl added a comment. Fre Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/python_api/target/TestTargetAPI.py:54 +self.setTearDownCleanup(dictionary=d) +self.find_compile_units('b.out') + apolyakov wrote: > aprantl wrote: > > shouldn't this be `sel

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48858: FIx XCode project files for lldb

teemperor created this revision. Herald added a subscriber: srhines. Fixes the XCode builds that started failing when i added CompletionRequest.cpp/.h. The patch is so large because XCode decided to write the lines back in its own order, but essentially we only added on e file. https://review

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48858: FIx XCode project files for lldb

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL336154: FIx XCode project files for lldb (authored by teemperor, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r336155 - [lldb-mi] Re-implement a few MI commands.

Author: apolyakov Date: Mon Jul 2 16:54:06 2018 New Revision: 336155 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=336155&view=rev Log: [lldb-mi] Re-implement a few MI commands. Summary: This patch updates exec-next-instruction, exec-step-instruction, exec-finish, exec-interrupt commands to use S

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48520: [lldb-mi] Re-implement a few MI commands.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL336155: [lldb-mi] Re-implement a few MI commands. (authored by apolyakov, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48520?vs=152715&id=1

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48775: Add new SBTarget::IsDummy method.

apolyakov added a comment. I think we can remove comments added by me and commit patch as it is. Any thoughts about it? https://reviews.llvm.org/D48775 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48775: Add new SBTarget::IsDummy method.

aprantl added a comment. Have you seen my earlier question: > Is the dummy target something we need to expose over the SBAPI? > I see that other places in lldb-mi query if (sbTarget == > rSessionInfo.GetDebugger().GetDummyTarget()). > Would that be sufficient? https://reviews.llvm.org/D4877

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48775: Add new SBTarget::IsDummy method.

apolyakov added a comment. It's hard to choose something, both variants are good enough. But, if there is no necessity in such a method, we can drop it. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48775 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http:

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r336158 - Re-sort the lldb.xcodeproj project file and commit the script

Added: lldb/trunk/scripts/sort-pbxproj.rb URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/lldb/trunk/scripts/sort-pbxproj.rb?rev=336158&view=auto == --- lldb/trunk/scripts/sort-pbxproj.rb (added) +++ lldb/trunk/scripts/sort-pbxpr

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r336158 - Re-sort the lldb.xcodeproj project file and commit the script

Author: jmolenda Date: Mon Jul 2 17:43:57 2018 New Revision: 336158 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=336158&view=rev Log: Re-sort the lldb.xcodeproj project file and commit the script that I used to sort it to scripts/sort-pbxproj.rb. It turns out that Xcode will perturb the order of

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48775: Add new SBTarget::IsDummy method.

aprantl added a comment. Okay then let's not do this for now. It's fine to revisit this later if there turns out to be a good use-case for it, but every SBAPI call we introduce has to be supported indefinitely and can therefore be quite expensive to maintain. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48775

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48775: Add new SBTarget::IsDummy method.

apolyakov abandoned this revision. apolyakov added a comment. Abandoned since suggested functionality is optional. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48775 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r336158 - Re-sort the lldb.xcodeproj project file and commit the script

Thank you Jason! On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 5:48 PM Jason Molenda via lldb-commits wrote: > > Author: jmolenda > Date: Mon Jul 2 17:43:57 2018 > New Revision: 336158 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=336158&view=rev > Log: > Re-sort the lldb.xcodeproj project file and commit the script

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48801: Add new API to SBTarget and SBModule classes.

apolyakov updated this revision to Diff 153846. apolyakov added a comment. Updated passing an argument to `find_compile_units` function. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48801 Files: include/lldb/API/SBModule.h include/lldb/API/SBTarget.h packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/python_api/module_section

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D48802: [lldb-mi] Re-implement symbol-list-lines command.

apolyakov updated this revision to Diff 153847. apolyakov added a comment. Removed `sb_target.IsDummy()` since `IsDummy` won't be a member of SBTarget class. Now `sb_target == rSessionInfo.GetDebugger().GetDummyTarget()` is used for this goal. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48802 Files: lit/tool