labath added a comment.
The functionality is fine, though I'd hope it can be cleaned up a bit.
As for testing, yes, yaml2obj has some problems roundtripping complex minidumps
(and elf files). Fortunately, for the functionality you're testing, I don't
think you really need the executable file, so you can just ignore the elf bit
and test with a plain `lldb -c foo.dmp` (obviously, you won't get the backtrace
that way, but you don't really need that here. Round-tripping minidumps is also
WIP -- I've only implemented the bits I have needed so far (I am adding
MemoryInfoList stream as we speak). For some streams that just means, they're
not getting pretty-printed, while for others (those that contain pointers to
other parts of the file) it means the reconstituted file ends up containing
garbage. The exception stream is one of those cases, but here it looks like you
actually want to test the case where the exception stream is not present (?),
so that might be fine. Or it might be fine if you manually remove the
ExceptionStream from the yaml? If you can send me the minidump you have
generated I can try to play around with it to see if I can make a reasonable
yaml out of it.
As for the "lldb/lit/Minidump or
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/postmortem/minidump-new" part,
the main difference there is how the test is written. Which one is better
depends on what you want to test and to some extent, also on personal
preference. The python tests are better when you want to programatically drive
lldb and have complex interactions with it. the lit tests are good for simply
executing a bunch of known commands, and verifying static output. For this
case, I think a lit test is definitely the easier route.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/minidump/ProcessMinidump.cpp:219-237
+
+ if (arch.GetTriple().isOSLinux()) {
+
+ SetUnixSignals(UnixSignals::Create(GetArchitecture()));
+
+ if (!m_thread_list.empty() &&
+ (!m_active_exception ||
----------------
Would it be possible to move this code (except maybe the SetUnixSignals bit)
into the `RefreshStateAfterStop` function? Would be less confusing and it would
avoid the need for extra member variables...
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68096/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68096
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
