labath added a comment. In D92187#2451013 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D92187#2451013>, @mgorny wrote:
> 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? Store in the class (probably as a weak_ptr), just like you did with the path.... 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
