Did you forget to add the new test to the changeset? On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 AM Pavel Labath <lab...@google.com> wrote:
> I have to say I quite like how this test turned out to look like. In > terms of the last night's SBAPI vs. lldb-mi vs. whateever discussion, > i'd can say that there is nothing preventing this test written in > terms of the SB API. I didn't do it that way, because I have > automatically written the test at the same level as the code I was > modifying (which generally means the test is more light-weight and > focused), but since the SBModule/SBSection don't have much additional > logic themselves, it does not matter much in this case. However, I > agree that we don't want to restrict ourselves to the SB API here -- > SB is good at providing a debugger API, but with this tool we are > explicitly not trying to test the debugger as a whole, but its > individual pieces. > > And as far as lldb-mi goes, writing a test for this through lldb-mi > would quite challenging, as it is too high level. afaik (and I can't > say that I know much about lldb-mi) there is no lldb-mi primitive that > would let me read raw section data. And even if there was, I'd have to > be very careful in constructing the test object file, so that it would > look "valid enough" that lldb-mi would dare touch it. > > > On 30 November 2017 at 14:02, Pavel Labath via Phabricator > <revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > > labath updated this revision to Diff 124926. > > labath added a comment. > > > > This rewrites the test in terms on the new lldb-test utility. It should > be applied on top of https://reviews.llvm.org/D40636. > > > > While doing that, I noticed a discrepancy in the data presented by the > object > > file interface -- for GetFileSize(), it would return the compressed > size, but, > > when reading the data, it would return the decompressed size. This > seemed odd > > and unwanted. > > > > So now I fetch the decompressed size when constructing the Section > object, and > > make sure GetFileSize result matches what the GetSectionData returns. > This is > > slightly odd as well, because now if someone looks at individual section > file > > offsets and sizes, it will seem that multiple sections overlap. While > > unfortunate, this is a situation that can arise in without the presence > of > > compressed sections (no linker will produce a file like that, but you can > > certainly hand-craft one), and our elf parser will hapily accept these > files. > > > > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D40616 > > > > Files: > > lit/CMakeLists.txt > > lit/Modules/compressed-sections.yaml > > lit/Modules/lit.local.cfg > > lit/lit.cfg > > lit/lit.site.cfg.in > > source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ObjectFileELF.cpp > > source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ObjectFileELF.h > > tools/lldb-test/lldb-test.cpp > > unittests/ObjectFile/ELF/TestObjectFileELF.cpp > > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
