YungRaj wrote: > > I was hoping to fix everything in one Pull Request so that it at least > > becomes usable once this merges. > > The LLVM project generally > [prefers](https://llvm.org/docs/CodeReview.html#code-reviews-speed-and-reciprocity) > smaller patches as they're easier to review. We'll definitely want to fix > the end-to-end issue and have a test, but the deserialization issue can stand > on its own and deserves its own PR.
Sounds good. Will divide the pull requests into multiple of them. So I tried to get symbolicating backtraces working, however, this is a bit more challenging, because LLVM doesn't have a good intuition of building a proper bound from start to finish of a function. It's not that I couldn't get addresses to symbolicate, but many functions that get symbolicated are actually from functions before it that had the subsequent function unsymbolicated. @JDevlieghere do you believe there is a way to fix LLDB's intuition of the proper bounds of functions based on function prologues (e.g. `BTI`, `PACIBSP`, `STP X29, X30, [SP, #-offset]!` on arm64) and epilogues (`RET`, `RETAB`, etc on arm64) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101062 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
