labath wrote: > > Sounds good. Could you split off the lldb parts to a separate review though? > > @labath I think we need both, in order to fix `SBProcess` to return all > memory regions we need the LLDB change, which enables us to test if the > yaml2obj generates correctly
I can believe you need the llvm changes for the lldb test. That's fine and expected. You can make those changes on a separate PR. However, there shouldn't code in llvm which is only tested from lldb. That's why I pointed you to all the existing tests for yaml2minidump functionality in llvm. You can test the llvm functionality through those. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101086 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
