clayborg added a comment. In D55356#1327099 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356#1327099>, @labath wrote:
> Actually, this now causes an lldb-mi test to fail, but it's not clear to me > if the problem is in the test, or this patch. This issue happens when lldb-mi > is printing the "library loaded" message after a module gets added to a > not-yet-running target. It tries to print the load address by first getting > the base address and then converting that to a load address. > > Before this patch, that would always fail, because well.. ELF and PECOFF had > this function unimplemented, and for MachO the base address was > section-relative, and so it wasn't resolved to a load address without the > section being loaded. However, with this patch, in the ELF (and presumably > PECOFF) case, the load address is not section-relative and so the > `GetLoadAddress` function happily returns the address. > > Is this the expected behavior here? (i.e., > object_file->GetLoadAddress().GetLoadAddress(target) returning a valid value > even though the target is not running) Not unless someone has manually set the section load address in the test? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55356 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
