Ahh yea I missed that. Makes sense On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:38 PM Siva Chandra <sivachan...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:21 PM Siva Chandra <sivachan...@google.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> > wrote: > >> > Why though? > >> > >> Foremost, I think it is because the lldb driver built as part of the > >> test is linked to the host lldb shared library. If you build a 32-bit > >> driver, we will need a 32-bit lldb shared library as well is it not? > > > > yes, but the Makefile isn't specifying the architecture to build. For me > > it's building an x86 driver, my python distribution is x86 and the > liblldb > > shared library is x86 too. So I don't see what the problem is. If > anything > > I'm not sure why it's building an x64 driver on other platforms, since > > nothing in the Makefile specifies that the Driver should be x64. > > > >> > >> > >> Second, which I think can be fixed, is that we we load an x86_64 > >> target explicitly here: multi-process-driver.cpp:104 > > > > I missed that, and that is a good enough reason for now. Although I > think > > it should be xfail instead of skip, because this is easily fixable by > just > > chekcing sizeof(void*) in the C++ side and passing a different arch when > > creating the target. > > > > As an aside, this seems like it would be much better as a unit test > instead > > of a python test, but I guess that's a different issue. > > > > I'll change the skip to an xfail for now, but I still don't see anything > > fundamentally incompatible with x86 here. > > That is why, in my first response, I said that a more apt skip > decorator would be @skipIfNotHostArch (after ofcourse fixing the > explicit x86_64 target requirement in the driver.) >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
