Might try adding this patch to the test case:
Index:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/breakpoint/breakpoint_case_sensitivity/TestBreakpointCaseSensitivity.py
===
---
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/break
I'm afraid this still wasn't enough to placate the bots.
http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-xcode/4647/
Can you please take another look?
--
Davide
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Davide Italiano wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Adrian Prantl via lldb-commits
> wrote:
>>
jasonmolenda created this revision.
jasonmolenda added a reviewer: labath.
jasonmolenda added a project: LLDB.
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.
I caught this while running the testsuite against lldb built with address
sanitizer (ASAN) enabled - it found one problem when running the
TestL
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Adrian Prantl via lldb-commits
wrote:
> Author: adrian
> Date: Thu Feb 1 14:18:02 2018
> New Revision: 324019
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324019&view=rev
> Log:
> Create a marker for Spotlight to never index $BUILD_DIR.
>
> LLDB queries Spotlig
Author: adrian
Date: Thu Feb 1 14:18:02 2018
New Revision: 324019
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324019&view=rev
Log:
Create a marker for Spotlight to never index $BUILD_DIR.
LLDB queries Spotlight to locate .dSYM bundles based on the UUID
embedded in a binary, and because the UUID
Author: hanming
Date: Thu Feb 1 13:46:40 2018
New Revision: 324013
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324013&view=rev
Log:
Make use of physical footprint as memory measurement.
Remove obsolete measurements.
This check in requires at least 10.11
Reviewed: Jason Molenda, Jim Ingham
Xc
Author: jingham
Date: Thu Feb 1 13:35:50 2018
New Revision: 324010
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324010&view=rev
Log:
Added lldbutil.run_to_name_breakpoint and use it in one test.
Using the "run_to_{source,name}_breakpoint will allow us to remove
a lot of boiler-plate from the tes
Author: jingham
Date: Thu Feb 1 13:31:14 2018
New Revision: 324008
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324008&view=rev
Log:
Remove unused Args variable, and #include of Args.h. NFC.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp
Modified: lldb/trunk/s
aprantl added inline comments.
Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/api/listeners/TestListener.py:26
TestBase.setUp(self)
-self.build()
labath wrote:
> I'm confused by these changes. I was under the impression that setUp() runs
> before
labath added inline comments.
Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/api/listeners/TestListener.py:26
TestBase.setUp(self)
-self.build()
I'm confused by these changes. I was under the impression that setUp() runs
before each test method (a
aprantl updated this revision to Diff 132456.
aprantl added a comment.
Fix broken testcases.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42763
Files:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/api/listeners/TestListener.py
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/breakpoint/comp_dir_symlink/TestCompDirSymLink.py
Yeah, no reason to pile on this patch, mostly I was making sure I understood
what we could do...
Jim
> On Feb 1, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Adrian Prantl via Phabricator
> wrote:
>
> aprantl added a comment.
>
> @jingham wrote:
>
>> Now that we aren't mixing variants, would it be possible to have
aprantl added a comment.
@jingham wrote:
> Now that we aren't mixing variants, would it be possible to have a test class
> claim that all the tests use the same binary file? At present to get
> self-contained tests you often need to do roughly the same thing many times,
> on the same binary.
Now that we aren't mixing variants, would it be possible to have a test class
claim that all the tests use the same binary file? At present to get
self-contained tests you often need to do roughly the same thing many times, on
the same binary. You only need to build it once per variant in that
aprantl updated this revision to Diff 132433.
aprantl added a comment.
Update the diff with Pavel's awesome suggestion of using self.testMethodName.
Note that that I haven't fixed all the resulting test error yet, I'm working
through those now.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42763
Files:
package
owenpshaw added a comment.
Thanks! Overall it's feeling like we're getting down to mainly differences in
personal preferences and judgements. Not sure if you're looking for a
discussion, which I'm happy to have, if you're just looking for changes to
definitely be made. If it's the latter, I
Yea good point. We can probably punt on this for now as it’s just a
nice-to-have
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 1:38 AM Pavel Labath via Phabricator <
revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
> labath added inline comments.
>
>
>
> Comment at: lit/SymbolFile/PDB/func-symbols.test:4
> +RUN: clang-
labath added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42195#995087, @clayborg wrote:
> I am pretty sure that the ack that gets sent should happen in response to
> getting an ACK. Note that LLDB send an ACK and then waits for an ACK. This
> helps us see if anything is there. So yes, this code can
aprantl added a comment.
lib/IR -> test/IR
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42763
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
clayborg added a comment.
I am pretty sure that the ack that gets sent should happen in response to
getting an ACK. Note that LLDB send an ACK and then waits for an ACK. This
helps us see if anything is there. So yes, this code can always just respond to
an unsolicited ACK with an ACK.
Reposi
owenpshaw added inline comments.
Comment at:
lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/gdb_remote_client/gdbclientutils.py:335-337
+# However, if we aren't expecting an ack, it's likely the initial
+# ack that lldb client sends, and observ
labath added inline comments.
Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbinline.py:96-98
+return "-N dwarf %s" % (testdir)
else:
+return "-N dsym %s" % (testdir)
aprantl wrote:
> labath wrote:
> > xiaobai wrote:
> > > Good opp
aprantl added a comment.
> I am not sure this actually creates enough separation.
That's a good point. If I manage to extract the testname somehow via Python
reflection magic, I could also get rid of the unintuitive self.mydir tuple.
I'll give that a try.
Comment at:
packag
aprantl updated this revision to Diff 132417.
aprantl added a comment.
Address review feedback from Alex.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42763
Files:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/api/listeners/TestListener.py
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/breakpoint/comp_dir_symlink/TestCompD
clayborg added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42145#994556, @labath wrote:
> I think we're slowly getting there, but we could cleanup the implementation a
> bit.
>
> I am also not sure that the `WriteObjectFile` name really captures what this
> function does, but I don't have a sugges
clayborg added a comment.
It would be nice if we can try and disable the redeclaration lookups from clang
when in debugger mode. I can't remember if we already have such a flag in the
compiler options. If we do, we should try to just disable this when in debug
expression mode and see how the te
Author: labath
Date: Thu Feb 1 07:35:55 2018
New Revision: 323974
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323974&view=rev
Log:
Extend windows->android XFAIL on TestLoadUnload
This fails regardless of the android architecture or compiler used. The
important bit is the mismatch in path separa
labath added inline comments.
Comment at:
lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/gdb_remote_client/gdbclientutils.py:335-337
+# However, if we aren't expecting an ack, it's likely the initial
+# ack that lldb client sends, and observati
Author: labath
Date: Thu Feb 1 03:29:06 2018
New Revision: 323953
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323953&view=rev
Log:
mock_gdb_server: rectify ack handling code
The mock server was sending acks back in response to spurious acks from
the client, but the client was not prepared to ha
labath added a comment.
I think we're slowly getting there, but we could cleanup the implementation a
bit.
I am also not sure that the `WriteObjectFile` name really captures what this
function does, but I don't have a suggestion for a better name either
Comment at: incl
labath added a comment.
I am not sure this actually creates enough separation. Plenty of tests have
more then one test method per file:
TestFoo.py:
class FooTestCase(TestBase):
NO_DEBUG_INFO_TESTCASE = True
def test_bar(self):
...
def test_baz(self):
...
If I underst
labath added inline comments.
Comment at: lit/SymbolFile/PDB/func-symbols.test:4
+RUN: clang-cl -m32 /Z7 /c /GS- %S/Inputs/FuncSymbols.cpp /o
%T/FuncSymbols.cpp.obj
+RUN: link %T/FuncSymbolsTestMain.cpp.obj %T/FuncSymbols.cpp.obj /DEBUG
/nodefaultlib /Entry:main /OUT:%T/FuncSym
32 matches
Mail list logo
