[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139945: [lldb] Add scripted process launch/attach option to platform commands

mib added a comment. In D139945#4011466 , @labath wrote: > In D139945#4009427 , @JDevlieghere > wrote: > >> In D139945#3999351 , @labath wrote: >> >>> For a "plugin", the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139251: [lldb/Interpreter] Introduce ScriptedPlatform{, Python}Interface

mib updated this revision to Diff 488488. mib added a comment. Add `AttachToProcess` method to interface CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139251/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139251 Files: lldb/include/lldb/Interpreter/ScriptInterpreter.h lldb/include/lldb/Interpreter

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139250: [lldb] Add ScriptedPlatform python implementation

mib updated this revision to Diff 488485. mib marked an inline comment as done. mib added a comment. Address @labath comments: - Rephrase documentation to remove any `Scripted Process` occurrence - Add `attach_to_process` affordance to python `Scripted Platform` class CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139250: [lldb] Add ScriptedPlatform python implementation

mib marked 5 inline comments as done. mib added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/examples/python/scripted_process/scripted_platform.py:31 +def list_processes(self): +""" Get a list of processes that can be ran on the platform. + labath wrote: > mib w

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

jasonmolenda added a comment. I guess to say it shorter. If I have a dwarf_aranges, that means the dwarf linker created it. And if it created it, surely its at least based off of the subprogram address ranges or the line table -- that is, the text address ranges. If I have a DW_TAG_compile_u

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

jasonmolenda added a comment. I know this is all moot because the dSYM-specific patch landed, but I am curious about this part, In D68655#4045561 , @clayborg wrote: > > Different things are included in DW_AT_ranges, like address ranges for global >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/tools/lldb-vscode/lldb-vscode.cpp:2177 + const auto max_instruction_size = g_vsc.target.GetMaximumOpcodeByteSize(); + const auto bytes_offset = -instruction_offset * max_instruction_size; + auto start_addr = base_addr - bytes_of

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/tools/lldb-vscode/lldb-vscode.cpp:2177 + const auto bytes_offset = -instruction_offset * bytes_per_instruction; + auto start_addr = base_addr - bytes_offset; + const auto disassemble_bytes = instruction_count * bytes_per_instruc

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

clayborg added a comment. In D68655#4045604 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > In D68655#4045561 , @clayborg wrote: > >> But we still need know if we have a dSYM file or not, because if not, we >> can't use .debug_aranges a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

clayborg added a comment. I mean we can not just subtract something, any number, from any address unless we have fixed size opcodes. If we do this for x86, you can get complete garbage with no hope of ever getting back on track and this disassembly just won't make sense at all and will be usele

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D68655#4045561 , @clayborg wrote: > But we still need know if we have a dSYM file or not, because if not, we > can't use .debug_aranges as .o files don't have them, but they also don't > claim to be of type ObjectFile::eT

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

clayborg added a comment. In D68655#4045461 , @jasonmolenda wrote: > In D68655#4045423 , @clayborg wrote: > >> There have also been some bugs in .debug_aranges and some folks want to get >> rid of .debug_aranges a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco added a comment. In D140358#4045469 , @eloparco wrote: > In D140358#4045450 , @clayborg > wrote: > >> In D140358#4045442 , @eloparco >> wrote: >> >>> In D140358

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141318: [lldb] Store shared pointers in DieToTypePtr map instead of raw pointers

clayborg added a comment. In D141318#4045459 , @augusto2112 wrote: > In D141318#4045372 , @clayborg > wrote: > >> Each SymbolFile has its own type list that keeps the shared pointers to all >> types. So there s

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco updated this revision to Diff 488415. eloparco added a comment. Use single-line comments Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358 Files: lldb/bindings/interface/SBTarget.i lldb/include

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco added a comment. In D140358#4045450 , @clayborg wrote: > In D140358#4045442 , @eloparco > wrote: > >> In D140358#4045210 , @clayborg >> wrote: >> >>> Are you pl

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/include/lldb/API/SBTarget.h:844 + uint32_t GetMaximumOpcodeByteSize() const; + clayborg wrote: > Do we still need this API change with the new approach? We can't really use > this unless we include GetMinimumOp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

jasonmolenda added a comment. In D68655#4045423 , @clayborg wrote: > There have also been some bugs in .debug_aranges and some folks want to get > rid of .debug_aranges all together and rely only upon the > DW_TAG_compile_unit's DW_AT_ranges. Tons of det

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141318: [lldb] Store shared pointers in DieToTypePtr map instead of raw pointers

augusto2112 added a comment. In D141318#4045372 , @clayborg wrote: > Each SymbolFile has its own type list that keeps the shared pointers to all > types. So there should be no need for any of these changes here unless > someone isn't correctly storing a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

clayborg added a comment. In D140358#4045442 , @eloparco wrote: > In D140358#4045210 , @clayborg > wrote: > >> Are you planning on updating the reverse disassembly code still on this >> patch? > > What do you me

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

clayborg added a comment. In D68655#4045420 , @clayborg wrote: > SymbolVendorELF.cpp is using this as well: > > dsym_objfile_sp->SetType(ObjectFile::eTypeDebugInfo); > > They must have copied and pasted some code. So not sure this is safe enough > as is

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco added a comment. In D140358#4045210 , @clayborg wrote: > Are you planning on updating the reverse disassembly code still on this patch? What do you mean by "reverse disassembly"? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

clayborg added a comment. There have also been some bugs in .debug_aranges and some folks want to get rid of .debug_aranges all together and rely only upon the DW_TAG_compile_unit's DW_AT_ranges. Tons of details in this patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136395 So long story short, some people b

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D68655: Trust the arange accelerator tables in dSYMs

clayborg added a comment. SymbolVendorELF.cpp is using this as well: dsym_objfile_sp->SetType(ObjectFile::eTypeDebugInfo); They must have copied and pasted some code. So not sure this is safe enough as is to implement. There are also a few places that try to check for a dSYM file using this

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141318: [lldb] Store shared pointers in DieToTypePtr map instead of raw pointers

clayborg added a comment. > Storing raw pointers in DieToTypePtr may cause use-after-frees to occur, > since there are no guarantees that the shared pointers that owns the > underlying pointer to the type are kept around as long as the map. Change the > map to store a shared pointer instead. T

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141318: [lldb] Store shared pointers in DieToTypePtr map instead of raw pointers

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Each SymbolFile has its own type list that keeps the shared pointers to all types. So there should be no need for any of these changes here unless someone isn't correctly storing

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139379: [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG7fc79340234f: [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit (authored by ayermolo). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 7fc7934 - [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit

Author: Alexander Yermolovich Date: 2023-01-11T15:07:11-08:00 New Revision: 7fc79340234f3acd354c52bd8bf2cf44f38fc4be URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7fc79340234f3acd354c52bd8bf2cf44f38fc4be DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7fc79340234f3acd354c52bd8bf2cf44f38fc4

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140630: [lldb-vscode] Add data breakpoint support

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added inline comments. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Comment at: lldb/test/API/tools/lldb-vscode/breakpoint_data/TestVSCode_setDataBreakpoints.py:74-81 +num_a = array_find(locals, lambda x: x['name']

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141539: [lldb][test] Replace use of p with expression (NFC)

kastiglione added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/test/API/functionalities/multiple-slides/TestMultipleSlides.py:74 +self.expect("expression/d ((int*)&first)[0]", substrs=['= 5']) +self.expect("expression/d ((int*)&second)[0]", substrs=['= 6']) self.as

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141539: [lldb][test] Replace use of p with expression (NFC)

kastiglione added a comment. I will add explicit tests for `p`. Comment at: lldb/test/API/python_api/file_handle/TestFileHandle.py:138 self.dbg.SetOutputFileHandle(f, False) -self.handleCmd('p/x 3735928559', collect_result=False, check=False) +

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139379: [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit

ayermolo updated this revision to Diff 488393. ayermolo added a comment. Trying a fix for arm. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139379/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139379 Files: bolt/lib/Core/DebugData.cpp bolt/lib/Rewrite/DWARF

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141539: [lldb][test] Replace use of p with expression (NFC)

aprantl accepted this revision. aprantl added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I think it makes sense to have one test that tests the `p` command alias and its parameter handling and have all other tests be explicit about whether they test the expression evaluator or t

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

clayborg added a comment. Are you planning on updating the reverse disassembly code still on this patch? Comment at: lldb/include/lldb/API/SBTarget.h:844 + uint32_t GetMaximumOpcodeByteSize() const; + Do we still need this API change with the new approach? W

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140253: [debugserver] Clear memory allocations after exec

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG58def623ca46: [debugserver] Clear memory allocations after exec (authored by bulbazord). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140253/new/ https://r

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 58def62 - [debugserver] Clear memory allocations after exec

Author: Alex Langford Date: 2023-01-11T13:37:16-08:00 New Revision: 58def623ca46f107d185d7f02b267ffa751aff97 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/58def623ca46f107d185d7f02b267ffa751aff97 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/58def623ca46f107d185d7f02b267ffa751aff97.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140253: [debugserver] Clear memory allocations after exec

jasonmolenda accepted this revision. jasonmolenda added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140253/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140253 __

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140800: [OptTable] Precompute OptTable prefixes union table through tablegen

serge-sans-paille marked 2 inline comments as done. serge-sans-paille added a comment. In D140800#4043723 , @nikic wrote: > Just to check, this isn't going to cause some warning spew about all those > OptTable implementations being non-final? nope. Why

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140800: [OptTable] Precompute OptTable prefixes union table through tablegen

serge-sans-paille updated this revision to Diff 488344. serge-sans-paille added a comment. Nits + rebase on main branch CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140800/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140800 Files: clang/lib/Driver/DriverOptions.cpp clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/G

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140249: [lldb] Do not deallocate memory after exec

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGf2f3b1a87ad2: [lldb] Do not deallocate memory after exec (authored by bulbazord). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140249/new/ https://reviews.

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] f2f3b1a - [lldb] Do not deallocate memory after exec

Author: Alex Langford Date: 2023-01-11T12:33:41-08:00 New Revision: f2f3b1a87ad294433986683864f75575c3a81779 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f2f3b1a87ad294433986683864f75575c3a81779 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f2f3b1a87ad294433986683864f75575c3a81779.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141539: [lldb][test] Replace use of p with expression (NFC)

kastiglione created this revision. kastiglione added a reviewer: aprantl. Herald added subscribers: kbarton, nemanjai. Herald added a project: All. kastiglione requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits. In API tests, replace use of the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140293: [lldb] Update custom commands to always be overrriden

mib added a comment. In D140293#4044524 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > LGTM. The pattern of `debugger.HandleCommand("command script add -o -c > [...]")` seems rather tedious. Would it make sense to add a wrapper to the > SBAPI that takes care of that? I thi

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140249: [lldb] Do not deallocate memory after exec

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM, thanks! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140249/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140249

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. That looks fine. I'm removing my objection, but that's just to the SB API parts, I'm not commenting on the vscode part. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358/new/ https://rev

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140368: [lldb] Consider all breakpoints in breakpoint detection

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM, thanks for figuring this out! Comment at: lldb/source/Target/StopInfo.cpp:540 +if (m_should_stop && !bp_loc_sp->GetBreakpoint().IsInternal()) +

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140293: [lldb] Update custom commands to always be overrriden

JDevlieghere accepted this revision. JDevlieghere added a comment. LGTM. The pattern of `debugger.HandleCommand("command script add -o -c [...]")` seems rather tedious. Would it make sense to add a wrapper to the SBAPI that takes care of that? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.o

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140249: [lldb] Do not deallocate memory after exec

jasonmolenda accepted this revision. jasonmolenda added a comment. LGTM. Jim? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140249/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140249 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lld

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141021: [lldb] Remove tools copied into LLDB.framework before install

bulbazord added a comment. In D141021#4043411 , @labath wrote: > Does this mean that the in-tree lldb will cease to be functional once someone > "installs" it? (at least until the next rebuild) I believe so, but only in the case where you are building t

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141425: [lldb] Add --gdb-format flag to dwim-print

kastiglione added a comment. @jingham The brief answer is that decisions have been based on compatibility with the behavior of `p`. 1. `expression` (also `p`) and `frame variable`, only support the the format part of gdb options. Neither support `--count` or `--size` and so don't support the e

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141330: [lldb] Limit 8b259fe573e1 to dSYMs

jasonmolenda added a comment. In D141330#4043397 , @labath wrote: > In D141330#4037932 , @JDevlieghere > wrote: > >> In D141330#4037925 , @aprantl >> wrote: >> >>> Shoul

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139379: [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit

ayermolo added a comment. https://reviews.llvm.org/D141504 TBH not 100% sure on the fix, but looking where it's failing, maybe it's some kind of interaction with APIs returning 64bit number, and 32bit format macros on ARM? I don't have access to ARM machine. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monor

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140800: [OptTable] Precompute OptTable prefixes union table through tablegen

nikic added a comment. Just to check, this isn't going to cause some warning spew about all those OptTable implementations being non-final? Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/Option/OptTable.h:256 +/// Specialization of +class GenericOptTable : public OptTable {

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139379: [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit

ayermolo added a comment. In D139379#4043492 , @RKSimon wrote: > @ayermolo This has broken some buildbots - please can you take a look? > https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/245/builds/3279 ok Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139379: [llvm][dwwarf] Change CU/TU index to 64-bit

RKSimon added a comment. @ayermolo This has broken some buildbots - please can you take a look? https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/245/builds/3279 Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139379/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139379 __

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D139250: [lldb] Add ScriptedPlatform python implementation

labath added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/examples/python/scripted_process/scripted_platform.py:64 +def launch_process(self, launch_info): +""" Launch a scripted process. + Does this really have to be a scripted process? Ideally, one could also l

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141021: [lldb] Remove tools copied into LLDB.framework before install

labath added a comment. Does this mean that the in-tree lldb will cease to be functional once someone "installs" it? (at least until the next rebuild) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D141021/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D141021

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D141330: [lldb] Limit 8b259fe573e1 to dSYMs

labath added a comment. In D141330#4037932 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > In D141330#4037925 , @aprantl wrote: > >> Should this be true for a fully linked ELF executable, too? > > Sounds reasonable, but adding @labath

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140368: [lldb] Consider all breakpoints in breakpoint detection

kpdev42 updated this revision to Diff 488154. kpdev42 added a comment. Renaming and cleanup according to review Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140368/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140368 Files: lldb/source/Target/StopInfo.cpp l

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco added a comment. @jingham I added the test that was missing Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D140358: [lldb-vscode] Add support for disassembly view

eloparco updated this revision to Diff 488117. eloparco added a comment. Add binding and test for SBTarget::GetMaximumOpcodeByteSize() Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140358 Files: lldb/binding