[lldb-dev] [Bug 28548] New: NamespaceBreakpointTestCase fails with gcc
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28548 Bug ID: 28548 Summary: NamespaceBreakpointTestCase fails with gcc Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P Component: All Bugs Assignee: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org Reporter: lab...@google.com CC: llvm-b...@lists.llvm.org Classification: Unclassified The test fails because the lldb decides that the name of the function `static int func()` is `::func()`. This happens because gcc does not output the DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name attribute for functions with internal linkage. At this point it is not clear to me whether we should fix the "demangling" of this function, or just make the test be less strict about the names it accepts. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. ___ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
[lldb-dev] [Bug 19247] TestStepNoDebug intermittent failures on Linux with test_step_{over, in}_*
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19247 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||lab...@google.com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from lab...@google.com --- I'm pretty sure this has been fixed already. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. ___ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
[lldb-dev] [Bug 28549] New: TestStepNoDebug.py fails with gcc and top-of-tree clang (3.9)
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28549 Bug ID: 28549 Summary: TestStepNoDebug.py fails with gcc and top-of-tree clang (3.9) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P Component: All Bugs Assignee: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org Reporter: lab...@google.com CC: llvm-b...@lists.llvm.org Classification: Unclassified Preliminary investigation for clang/i386 case suggests that this is due to the fact that our instruction emulation does not create a good unwind plan. GCC issue has similar symptoms but remains untriaged. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. ___ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
[lldb-dev] Out of the office until July 25th
Just letting everyone know in advance so that you know that I am not ignoring any patches that are submitted over the next week and a half! Greg Clayton ___ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
