mgorny added a comment. In D92187#2450976 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D92187#2450976>, @labath wrote:
> In D92187#2450526 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D92187#2450526>, @mgorny wrote: > >> Another fix: we should only unload duplicate ld.so if it's actually a >> duplicate, i.e. the path differs. Otherwise, we've ended up unloading the >> only copy. > > Would comparing the module shared_pointers work? I think that's exactly what > we want here. I think it's possible for `LoadModuleAtAddress` to return the > same module, even with paths which don't match exactly. But if it does that, > then we will still end up unloading the original interpreter module... How do you suggest we get the shared pointer for comparison? Store in class instance, or search for it somehow? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D92187/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D92187 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
