labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In D68939#1707998 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68939#1707998>, @mstorsjo wrote: > In D68939#1707985 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68939#1707985>, @labath wrote: > > > Would you say that "pc" is a reasonable value for the "vendor" field for > > the win+aarch64 combo? I am asking because I don't have a clue about that, > > and given that this platform is being brought up right now, changing this > > now would be way easier than doing it later. (The reason why things don't > > work is the incompatibility between the two things that compute the > > ArchSpec, but that can also be fixed by changing the other mechanism, if > > that is better/more correct.) My guess is the other mechanism is > > ArchSpec::SetArchitecture function, line 928... > > > I'd say "pc" is fine here; such machines are available for sale (although > with a bit scarce availability) as normal power efficient laptops - google > for e.g. HP Envy X2, for one that is available with both arm and x86 cpu > options. So, am I correct to assume that "pc" is used/can be used for any "personal computer"? I was under the impression that pc stands for the PCs which are descended/compatible with the original IBM PCs... Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D68939/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D68939 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
