vsk added a comment.
In D89283#2336120 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D89283#2336120>, @wallace wrote:
> @vsk, I agree with you regarding the files. At the moment our implementation
> of intel-pt tracing doesn't support collecting a trace, but soon we'll do so.
> Then, we'll be able to generate these trace files on the fly as the tests
> run, so I imagine I'll be deleting these binary files. For the time being I
> doubt I'll include any new binary, as what is included is more than enough to
> test the basic decoding functionalities.
That seems promising. Deleting those binary files after the fact doesn't
address the issue, though, as they'd be part of the history. I have a question
about that ld-2.17.so file in particular: is there no way to decoder/traverse a
trace of a process that loads a dylib, without copying all of ld.so into the
source tree? That seems very surprising -- I'd expect the decoder API to allow
you to skip right over PC ranges that have nothing to do with the binary you
want to debug.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/Trace.cpp:81
+static int GetNumberOfDigits(size_t num) {
+ int digits_count = 0;
+ do {
----------------
Just 'assert(num); return ceill(log10(num));'?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D89283/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D89283
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
