================
@@ -969,6 +969,84 @@ Status MinidumpFileBuilder::DumpDirectories() const {
return error;
}
+Status MinidumpFileBuilder::ReadWriteMemoryInChunks(
+ const std::unique_ptr<lldb_private::DataBufferHeap> &data_up,
+ const lldb_private::CoreFileMemoryRange &range, uint64_t *bytes_read) {
+ if (!data_up)
+ return Status::FromErrorString("No buffer supplied to read memory.");
+ Log *log = GetLog(LLDBLog::Object);
+ const lldb::addr_t addr = range.range.start();
+ const lldb::addr_t size = range.range.size();
+ // First we set the byte tally to 0, so if we do exit gracefully
+ // the caller doesn't think the random garbage on the stack is a
+ // success.
+ if (bytes_read)
+ *bytes_read = 0;
+
+ uint64_t bytes_remaining = size;
+ uint64_t total_bytes_read = 0;
+ Status error;
+ while (bytes_remaining > 0) {
+ // Get the next read chunk size as the minimum of the remaining bytes and
+ // the write chunk max size.
+ const size_t bytes_to_read =
+ std::min(bytes_remaining, MAX_WRITE_CHUNK_SIZE);
----------------
jeffreytan81 wrote:
I am not a big fan of this -- you are trying to ensure the reading won't exceed
`data_up` buffer size, then you should use `data_up->GetSize()` here instead of
`MAX_WRITE_CHUNK_SIZE`. What is the `data_up` is smaller than
`MAX_WRITE_CHUNK_SIZE`? Then you are relying on the fact that `size` from the
range ensures `data_up` size. You can see there are two much coupling logic
between caller and callee here.
I would change to `std::min(bytes_remaining, data_up->GetSize());`. That's the
purpose of passing `data_up` into this function anyway, otherwise, we should
pass `data_up->GetBytes()` into this function.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129307
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
