labath added a comment.
Thanks for splitting this up. This looks fine to me, modulo some nits, but lets
wait @clayborg has to say.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/Memory.cpp:63
if (pos != m_L1_cache.begin()) {
- --pos;
+ pos--;
}
----------------
I guess this is a leftover from splitting the patches?
Speaking of post-increment the [[
http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#prefer-preincrement | llvm rule ]] is
to use pre-increment whereever possible. I see the test uses post-increment
exclusively for no good reason.
================
Comment at: lldb/unittests/Target/MemoryCacheTest.cpp:30
+ MemoryCacheTest()
+ : m_cache(*this, k_cache_line_size), m_inferior_read_count(0) {
+ // Fill memory from [0x0 - 0x256) with byte values that match the index. We
----------------
You can move setting of `m_inferior_read_count` into the initializer.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77790/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77790
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
