bulbazord added a comment.
Seems okay to me.
@JDevlieghere How does this look to you?
================
Comment at:
lldb/examples/python/scripted_process/crashlog_scripted_process.py:34-37
+ for section in image.section_infos:
+ if section.start_addr and section.name == "__TEXT":
+ self.loaded_images.append({"uuid":
str(image.uuid),
+ "load_addr":
section.start_addr})
----------------
mib wrote:
> bulbazord wrote:
> > I don't understand the intent of this part. It looks like you're changing
> > the format of `self.loaded_images` here. It's still a List, but instead of
> > containing images it contains specific information about specific sections
> > of each image. If the format has changed, don't consumers of
> > `get_loaded_images` need to be modified as well?
> The list for this specific scripted process class was wrong, it expects the
> current format. Previously we didn't make use of `loaded_images` for the
> crashlog_scripted_process class, we just relied on some ad hoc heuristic to
> load the modules.
> The other consumers of `get_loaded_images` are fine.
Ah, that makes sense. If one wanted to know what the format of `loaded_images`
*should* be, how would they find out? Is that information documented or encoded
anywhere? Or is it more ad-hoc?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D141702/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D141702
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
