Author: zturner
Date: Fri Sep 11 15:00:39 2015
New Revision: 247459
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247459&view=rev
Log:
XFAIL 2 breakpoint tests on Windows.
llvm.org/pr24777
Modified:
lldb/trunk/test/functionalities/thread/thread_specific_break/TestThreadSpecificBreakpoint.py
Author: zturner
Date: Fri Sep 11 15:01:24 2015
New Revision: 247460
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247460&view=rev
Log:
XFAIL miscellaneous tests on windows.
llvm.org/pr24778
Modified:
lldb/trunk/test/expression_command/issue_11588/Test11588.py
lldb/trunk/test/functionaliti
Heh, I was just about to commit this exact same fix. Thanks
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:48 PM Oleksiy Vyalov via lldb-commits <
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Author: ovyalov
> Date: Fri Sep 11 15:46:46 2015
> New Revision: 247469
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247469&view
Author: zturner
Date: Fri Sep 11 16:27:37 2015
New Revision: 247479
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247479&view=rev
Log:
Fix a thinko causing test logs for crashes to not get written.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/test/lldbtest.py
Modified: lldb/trunk/test/lldbtest.py
URL:
http://llvm.o
Thank you, the naming conventions were always a huge source of confusion.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:01 PM Jason Molenda via lldb-commits <
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> jasonmolenda removed rL LLVM as the repository for this revision.
> jasonmolenda updated this revision to Diff 34593.
>
I can't check this until Monday. But drive by comment: Why do we need the
MAPMODE? Can't the JUnitFormatter just treat xpasses as whatever it wants
without the help of this option?
Also, I'm not really familiar with JUnit as a general tool. Is there some
reason a one-size-fits-all JSON formatte
Sorry this took so long. Here's my first run:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "D:/src/llvm/tools/lldb/test/dotest.py", line 1416, in
import dosep
File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test\dosep.py", line 48, in
import dotest_channels
File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test\dotest_channe
If you check the python docs, it looks like you just can't use
asyncore.file_dispatcher and asyncore.file_wrapper. Everything else seems
ok. Just search the page for "Availability" and the only hits you get are
on those 2 fields, which says they are UNIX specific.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:44 P
This appears to work now. Thansk for working on this, I'm glad to see the
test suite finally get some love.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:08 PM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> @zturner, can you give this a shot? Thanks!
>
>
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D12831
>
>
>
>
_
Just a drive by comment since I don't have a vested interest in lldb-server
or this CL at the moment. But adding lldb-server as a dependency of lldb
seems strange to me. I mean I get it, it just seems strange. They're not
really dependencies in the normal sense. If you just use "ninja" instead
zturner added a comment.
Instead of test/functionalities/minidump, I would probably call this
test/functionalities/core-file/windows.
I'm using core-file instead of minidump because it's the most generic term that
will make sense on all platforms, and other platforms will essentially want to
a
zturner added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12888#247195, @amccarth wrote:
> > Instead of test/functionalities/minidump, I would probably call this
> > test/functionalities/core-file/windows.
>
>
> Hmm...
>
> There is talk of (eventually) debugging minidumps on other platforms. Also
>
looks fine.
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:02 AM Adrian McCarthy
wrote:
> amccarth updated this revision to Diff 34906.
> amccarth added a comment.
>
> Addressed earlier comments and moved to functionalities\postmortem\minidump
>
>
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D12888
>
> Files:
> test/functionalities
Author: zturner
Date: Wed Sep 16 13:08:45 2015
New Revision: 247826
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247826&view=rev
Log:
Silence compiler warnings about unhandled switch cases.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/source/Symbol/ClangASTContext.cpp
Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Symbol/ClangASTCont
Author: zturner
Date: Wed Sep 16 13:08:33 2015
New Revision: 247825
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247825&view=rev
Log:
Last set of XFAILs for Windows.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/test/api/multiple-debuggers/TestMultipleDebuggers.py
lldb/trunk/test/expression_command/test/TestExprs
Author: zturner
Date: Wed Sep 16 13:19:06 2015
New Revision: 247830
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247830&view=rev
Log:
Remove XFAIL from TestCppNsImport.
This test seems to be working now, probably due to r244764.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/test/lang/cpp/nsimport/TestCppNsImport.py
Author: zturner
Date: Wed Sep 16 15:13:53 2015
New Revision: 247841
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247841&view=rev
Log:
Fix log disable command in ProcessWindowsLog.
The implications of this bug where that "log disable windows" would
not actually disable the log, and worse it would
Author: zturner
Date: Wed Sep 16 15:14:01 2015
New Revision: 247842
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247842&view=rev
Log:
add a dependency on terminfo library if llvm uses it
Ncurses related symbols can either all be found in libnurses or split
between libncurses and libtinfo. The mai
zturner closed this revision.
zturner added a comment.
Sorry this took so long, I forgot about it. It has been committed in r247842.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12672
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-
Author: zturner
Date: Thu Sep 17 15:18:50 2015
New Revision: 247929
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=247929&view=rev
Log:
Fix a race condition when terminating inferiors on Windows.
If a breakpoint was hit in the inferior after shutdown had
started but before it was complete, it would
One possible solution is to make an lldb-all target.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:38 AM Ilia K wrote:
> ki.stfu added a comment.
>
> i. e. +1 with @zturner
>
>
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D12899
>
>
>
>
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm
zturner added a comment.
One possible solution is to make an lldb-all target.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12899
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
zturner added inline comments.
Comment at: source/Host/windows/FileSystem.cpp:130
@@ +129,3 @@
+HANDLE file_handle = ::CreateFile(file_spec.GetCString(),
+ GENERIC_READ,
+ FILE_SHARE_READ,
--
Ok, lgtm then
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 10:42 AM Oleksiy Vyalov wrote:
> ovyalov added inline comments.
>
>
> Comment at: source/Host/windows/FileSystem.cpp:130
> @@ +129,3 @@
> +HANDLE file_handle = ::CreateFile(file_spec.GetCString(),
> +
zturner created this revision.
zturner added a reviewer: amccarth.
zturner added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
Log file pre-patch:
1442531634.44200 [0448/5520]: DoDetach called for process 25769804660 while
state = 2673276. Detaching...
1442531634.44200 [0448/5520]: StopDebugging('false')
I should be able to move it into `HandleExceptionEvent`
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 1:39 PM Adrian McCarthy wrote:
> amccarth accepted this revision.
> This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
>
>
> Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/Windows/Live/DebuggerThread.cpp:309
> @@
Can you move this to FileSystem.h? I don't think we should be adding more
things that hit the file system to FileSpec. That's exactly the reason
FileSystem.h exists, because many of the operations will be implemented
differently across platforms, so we should be using the Host layer.
On Fri, Sep
Any time there's something involving windows, even if you're just
#ifdef'ing out a code path, I would prefer if you could wait until I or
someone else who works on Windows has a chance to comment before committing.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:40 PM Sean Callanan via lldb-commits <
lldb-commits@lists
zturner added a comment.
Furthermore, FileSpec can refer to a remote path, so you can't even
guarantee that the OS you're on is the same OS as that which the path
refers to. So another reason why putting this in FileSpec doesn't make
sense in my opinion.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12984
__
Thanks! Feel free to leave the method in Host/windows/FileSystem.cpp
empty, i'll fill it out.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 3:08 PM Sean Callanan wrote:
> spyffe added a subscriber: spyffe.
> spyffe added a comment.
>
> Sure. On it.
>
> Sean
>
>
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D12984
>
>
>
>
_
zturner added a comment.
If you change the name back to `ResolveSymbolicLink` or
`GetSymbolicLinkTarget`, then this looks fine.
Comment at: include/lldb/Host/FileSystem.h:43
@@ -42,1 +42,3 @@
+
+static Error Realpath(const FileSpec &src, FileSpec &dst);
--
zturner accepted this revision.
zturner added a comment.
Thanks!
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12984
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
This is great, I've been thinking about implementing the exact same thing
myself.
Is it possible to remove the need to call self.build()? It seems like the
the wrapped_run function could do it before invoking the actual test
method. This way a large majority of tests could be made simpler.
If y
zturner added a subscriber: zturner.
zturner added a comment.
This is great, I've been thinking about implementing the exact same thing
myself.
Is it possible to remove the need to call self.build()? It seems like the
the wrapped_run function could do it before invoking the actual test
method.
I am at CppCon all week. If you need to get this in before Monday, can you
have Oleksiy or Chaoren test on Windows? Otherwise I can take a look next
week.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:51 AM Tamas Berghammer
wrote:
> tberghammer retitled this revision from "[RFC] Merge dsym and dwarf test
> cases"
zturner added a comment.
I am at CppCon all week. If you need to get this in before Monday, can you
have Oleksiy or Chaoren test on Windows? Otherwise I can take a look next
week.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13028
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-c
zturner added a comment.
At some point I really would love to reduce the number of decorators. It's
starting to get ridiculous :)
Seems like we only need one decorator that takes everything as optional
arguments
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13028
___
At some point I really would love to reduce the number of decorators. It's
starting to get ridiculous :)
Seems like we only need one decorator that takes everything as optional
arguments
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:42 AM Tamas Berghammer
wrote:
> tberghammer added a comment.
>
> In http://revie
If you change "enum" to "enum class" I think it will work (IANALL but I
think it's even more correct). But if what you've done works, then that
should be fine.
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:50 PM Enrico Granata via lldb-commits <
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Author: enrico
> Date: Wed Sep 2
If I understand correctly, the process hierarchy used to look like this:
python - dotest.py
|__ python - multiprocessing fork
|__ python - lldbtest
|__ inferior executable
And now looks like this:
python - dotest.py
|__ python - lldbtest
|__ inferior executable
In
I'm ok with leaving some straggling processes on Windows for now, because
it's obviously better than what we have currently, which is nothing. I can
implement some sort of helper module at some point that exposes a new
createProcess function that supports this for Windows and Unix with a
single in
I don't want compiler options in the test Makefiles. Please move the logic
to Makefile.rules, and create a variable and set that instead.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:43 AM Greg Clayton via lldb-commits <
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> clayborg added a comment.
>
> Each shared library is an
zturner added a comment.
I know, I've seen them in a few places myself. But I think we should move
away from that, because it's a large source of portability problems
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13066
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.l
ill build one target and use
-fno-limit-debug-info. If only DEBUG_INFO_LIMITED is true, it will build
one target and use -flimit-debug-info. If both are true, it will build two
targets, one for each case.
Does this seem reasonable?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:57 PM Zachary Turner wrote:
>
Also,when you say the next iteration, is this something that is going to
happen at an unknown time in the future whenever you happen to touch it
again, or are you working on another iteration now?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:25 PM Zachary Turner wrote:
> To be clear, I would like this Makefile
zturner added a comment.
Also,when you say the next iteration, is this something that is going to
happen at an unknown time in the future whenever you happen to touch it
again, or are you working on another iteration now?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13066
zturner added a comment.
To be clear, I would like this Makefile to turn into the following:
LEVEL = ../../../make
CXX_SOURCES = main.cpp length.cpp
DEBUG_INFO_FULL = True
DEBUG_INFO_LIMITED = True
And that's it. You shouldn't need anything else. Whatever needs to happen
in Makefile.rules to
+100, great :) Once it's in it will be much more easy to press for others
to move their platform specific bits into this module, or to do it myself
when I'm writing platform specific stuff.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 9:56 PM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> > That's a good idea. I'm
I won't be able to have a serious look until Monday, as I'm still remote.
Hopefully you arent working on weekends :)
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 6:30 PM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added inline comments.
>
>
> Comment at: test/dosep.py:245
> @@ +244,3 @@
> +# binary should ha
zturner requested changes to this revision.
zturner added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
I know you are just following the existing pattern, but this whole function
appears broken in the presence of file systems that use backslash instead of
forward slash. Could you t
Will test this out tomorrow
On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 10:28 PM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala updated this revision to Diff 35829.
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> Tests added. Ready for review.
>
> The change now has two levels of terminate:
>
> - soft terminate, which uses a signal or process control
zturner added a subscriber: zturner.
zturner requested changes to this revision.
zturner added a reviewer: zturner.
zturner added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Can you find a way to add a test for this?
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13202
Sorry, our desks were reconfigured over the weekend, so I just now got my
computer turned on. I'm syncing code and hopefully will have a working
build soon.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 9:28 AM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124#254487, @labath wrote:
>
zturner added a comment.
Looks good to me. Just add a decorator to both tests to skip unless the
compiler is gcc or clang ( `__attribute((vector_size))__` doesn't work on MSVC
or clang-cl, for example
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13202
__
zturner added a comment.
Actually I'm wrong. Leave it enabled and I'll see what happens. clang-cl
(which we require for windows tests) supports that syntax after all.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13202
___
lldb-commits mailing
Can you rebase against ToT? I'm having trouble applying the patch.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124#254935, @tfiala wrote:
>
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124#254900, @zturner wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, our desks
zturner added a comment.
Sorry, ignore me. My brain is just off, it's working
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
This is what I get.
d:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test>cd test_runner
d:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test\test_runner>cd test
d:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test\test_runner\test>c:\Python27_LLDB\x86\python_d.exe
process_control_tests.py
..E.EE
==
ERR
As far as I can tell, the value of the return code is undocumented when you
use Popen.terminate() on Windows. I don't know what that means for the
patch. It's quite a bit more complicated than I anticipated based on the
original thread to lldb-dev. I thought it was just going to call
Popen.termi
Yea, on Windows we can support core dump generation externally without
touching the python script, so that's not neded for us.
Ironically, at the system level there is a way to specify the return code
of the process when you terminate it. And Python internally must be using
this API, because it's
zturner added a comment.
A few more comments
Comment at: test/test_runner/test/process_control_tests.py:63
@@ +62,3 @@
+def _suppress_soft_terminate(cls, command):
+if platform.system() == 'nt':
+# Add whatever is needed to the command line to
---
Random thought: If you want to generate a core dump, we already have LLDB
attached to the process, so you have an SBProcess. Couldn't you use
Process.Halt, then call whatever method is necessary to have the debugger
create a core, then Process.Kill?
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:03 PM Zachary T
zturner added a subscriber: zturner.
zturner added a comment.
Can you change the name of the folder to something more descripive than
`pr24916`. For example, you could put `pr24916` in a comment in the test, but
the test itself could have a descriptive name. Enrico at Apple just went and
did
zturner added a comment.
Makefile stuff looks good. Is the plan to do the same thing for the previous
patch you submitted last week? What's the status of that?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13224
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.o
zturner added a comment.
As for the test, this could be a good candidate for a unit test. It's not
advertised very well so there's definitely some work for us to do on that
front, but basically you can run `ninja check-lldb-unit`. Seems like you could
just create a `ModuleSpec` on the stack,
zturner added inline comments.
Comment at: test/test_runner/test/process_control_tests.py:63
@@ +62,3 @@
+def _suppress_soft_terminate(cls, command):
+if platform.system() == 'nt':
+# Add whatever is needed to the command line to
tfiala wro
zturner added inline comments.
Comment at: test/test_runner/test/process_control_tests.py:63
@@ +62,3 @@
+def _suppress_soft_terminate(cls, command):
+if platform.system() == 'nt':
+# Add whatever is needed to the command line to
zturner wr
zturner added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124#255140, @tfiala wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124#255058, @zturner wrote:
>
> > Random thought: If you want to generate a core dump, we already have LLDB
> > attached to the process, so you have an SBProcess. Couldn't you use
>
zturner added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13124#255144, @tfiala wrote:
> Ah I see I morphed all those together (the platform naming).
>
> > ... bummed to see them under test_runner...
>
>
> Heh, that's funny. I was attempting to do a service of decluttering that top
> level test dire
lpath`
that `readlink` don't provide. If not, maybe we can delete
`FileSystem::ResolveSymbolicLink` and use `FileSystem::Readlink` instead.
What do you think?
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:42 PM Zachary Turner wrote:
> Any time there's something involving windows, even if you're just
zturner added a comment.
This looks great. This has always really annoyed me. One thing I want to
point out based on your summary of the patch. A user *must* build Python
himself, even if he is building a release version of LLDB. You *cannot* use
the version that is installed on the system.
zturner added inline comments.
Comment at: cmake/modules/LLDBConfig.cmake:61
@@ +60,3 @@
+ # below, otherwise CMake will replace the whitespace with a semicolon in
some contexts (which would stuff things up).
+ set (PYTHON_EXECUTABLE
$<$:${PYTHON_DEBUG_EXE}>$<$>:${PYTH
zturner accepted this revision.
zturner added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
If the above if / else is equivalent, I prefer if you change it to that before
comitting. If not, feel free to commit as is.
Comment at: cmake/modules/LLDBConfig.cmake:61
Sorry got sidetracked this morning. I'll check it out now
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:12 PM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> Hey Zachary,
>
> Have you seen diff 5 or diff 6 on Windows yet? What results did you get?
> I think I'm just waiting on a clean Windows run at this point.
zturner added inline comments.
Comment at: test/test_runner/lib/process_control.py:214
@@ +213,3 @@
+"""
+raise Exception("platform needs to implement")
+
Should this return `False` now that this is not supported on Windows, or do you
think this i
Unless you make significant other changes, feel free to just commit. I
don't have any other concerns. Thanks for working on this!
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:51 PM Todd Fiala wrote:
> tfiala added a comment.
>
> > Does that look right to you?
>
>
> That result looks right - the two soft termina
zturner created this revision.
zturner added a reviewer: clayborg.
zturner added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
Hi Greg,
This patch is pretty straightforward, but I'm posting it here because the fact
that you were explicitly casting to reference through an instance suggests that
maybe there's a de
zturner added a subscriber: tatyana-krasnukha.
zturner added a comment.
It would be nice if You could replace the logic that iterates these arrays.
We no longer need to terminate on a sentinel nullptr entry and can now use
range based for loop
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D
zturner added a comment.
You might be right, I’m on mobile so hard for me to review. I saw a bunch
of nullptr so assumed it was still using sentinel values for iterating. If
not, ignore my suggestion
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52572
___
zturner added a comment.
No, separate revision is fine. Thanks!
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52572
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
zturner added a subscriber: aleksandr.urakov.
zturner added a comment.
It requires a lot of work (nobody has started porting it). lldb-server
exists on other platforms but it basically needs a full port to Windows. It
doesn’t use the same process plugin, but it would instead use a different
plugin
zturner accepted this revision.
zturner added a comment.
Can you change the description of the patch before submitting it? It's hard to
understand why the change does what the description says it does, because the
description mentions 3 types of chars but the patch only handles 1. I would
jus
zturner added a comment.
Couple of options:
1. Can you give an example of before/after output?
2. Is the `size_t` change related?
3. Can you use -U99 in the future when generating patches?
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52627
_
zturner added a comment.
s/options/comments/
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52627
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
zturner accepted this revision.
zturner added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
BTW, I wrote a demangler for Windows ABI that should be 100% complete modulo
bugs and can generate an AST that RichManglingContext should use. So it would
be interesting if someone decided
zturner added a comment.
I think it’s fine. Eventually when you are ready to support remote
debugging hopefully we can convert it over to using lldb-server
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52618
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
htt
zturner added a comment.
One idea would be to define some lit substitutions like %debuginfo. It’s
true you can produce a gcc style command line that will be equivalent to a
clang-cl invocation but it won’t be easy. eg you’ll needing to pass
-fms-compatibility as well as various -I for includes.
I
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52618#1251076, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52618#1250909, @zturner wrote:
>
> > One idea would be to define some lit substitutions like %debuginfo. It’s
> > true you can produce a gcc style command line that will b
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52618#1252372, @labath wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52618#1250909, @zturner wrote:
>
> > One idea would be to define some lit substitutions like %debuginfo. It’s
> > true you can produce a gcc style command line that will be equivale
zturner added a comment.
> By the way, what do you think, how can we make LLDB support aligned stacks?
> As far as I know, similar alignment problems are reproducible on non-Windows
> too.
When you see VFRAME, you need to look in FPO data. As you might have guessed,
VFRAME only occurs in X86.
zturner added a comment.
You didn't include it here, but I notice the test file just writes `clang-cl
/Zi`. Should we be passing `-m32` or `-m64`? Currently, the test just runs
with whatever architecture happens to be set via the VS command prompt. The
behavior here is different on x86 and x
zturner accepted this revision.
zturner added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Nice find, thanks
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D53090
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://li
zturner added a comment.
If you plan to invest in more substantial changes in `ObjectFilePECOFF`, it
might worth considering a complete re-write in terms of `llvm::object::coff`.
It has pretty comprehensive support for the PE/COFF spec, so it's just a matter
of implementing `ObjectFilePECOFF`
zturner added inline comments.
Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbtest.py:2230-2233
+# In Python 2, communicate sends byte strings. In Python 3,
communicate sends bytes.
+# If we got a string (and not a byte string), encode it before sending.
+
zturner added a subscriber: vsk.
zturner added a comment.
See the other email thread. The bots have been broken since September, all
of them complain about missing FileCheck executable
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D50478
___
l
zturner added a subscriber: aprantl.
zturner added a comment.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D53002
Is the thread I'm referring to.
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D50478
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http:/
zturner added a subscriber: vsk.
zturner added a comment.
Why is FileCheck missing in the first place?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D53175
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-comm
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53086#1261697, @aleksandr.urakov wrote:
> Thanks a lot for so detailed answer, it helps!
>
> So we need to parse a FPO program and to convert it in a DWARF expression
> too. The problem here (in the DIA case) is that I don't know how to retri
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53086#1263001, @zturner wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53086#1261697, @aleksandr.urakov wrote:
>
> > Thanks a lot for so detailed answer, it helps!
> >
> > So we need to parse a FPO program and to convert it in a DWARF expression
> > t
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52461#1265335, @aleksandr.urakov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I just have tried to patch `CPlusPlusNameParser` in the way to support MSVC
> demangled names, but there is a problem. `CPlusPlusNameParser` splits an
> incoming name in tokens with `clang
2201 - 2300 of 3010 matches
Mail list logo
