bulbazord added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Expression/LLVMUserExpression.cpp:340-348
+ Process *process_sp;
+ ABISP abi_sp;
+ if ((process_sp = exe_ctx.GetProcessPtr()) &&
+ (abi_sp = process_sp->GetABI())) {
+ stack_frame_size = abi_sp->GetStackFrameSize();
+ } else {
+ stack_frame_size = 512 * 1024;
----------------
kuilpd wrote:
> bulbazord wrote:
> > A few things:
> > - I don't think you need to re-extract process from `exe_ctx`, the variable
> > `process` at the beginning of this function should have a valid Process
> > pointer in it already (see: `LockAndCheckContext` at the beginning of this
> > function). We already assume `target` is valid and use it in the same way.
> > - If we can't get an ABI from the Process, do we want to assume a stack
> > frame size of `512 * 1024`? Maybe there is a use case I'm missing, but if
> > we don't have an ABI I'm not convinced that `PrepareToExecuteJITExpression`
> > should succeed. LLDB will need some kind of ABI information to correctly
> > set up the register context to call the JITed code anyway.
> - I tried that, but a lot of tests fail on `GetABI()` after that, so had to
> re-extract it. Not sure why.
> - `512 * 1024` is what was hardcoded there by default. It makes sense that
> ABI has to exist, but leaving no default value in case if it's not retreived
> is weird as well. Or should we return an error in that case?
>
How do the tests fail? If the process is wrong that sounds like a pretty bad
bug :(
I would think that we could return `false` with some logging or an error would
be appropriate if we don't have an ABI. I may be misunderstanding something but
I would think that the tests should still pass when we `return false` there...
I hope.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D149262/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D149262
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
