https://github.com/labath approved this pull request.
XFAIL would probably be better as this sounds like something that should work.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists
@@ -407,6 +406,15 @@ CompileUnit *Function::GetCompileUnit() { return
m_comp_unit; }
const CompileUnit *Function::GetCompileUnit() const { return m_comp_unit; }
+Address Function::GetAddress() const {
+ if (m_ranges.empty())
+return Address();
+ // We're using a (DWARF
https://github.com/slydiman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
Author: Dmitry Vasilyev
Date: 2024-11-14T11:28:17+04:00
New Revision: 3d3b0bc239cd9c6e8c65ae26bdcf1534515c4beb
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/3d3b0bc239cd9c6e8c65ae26bdcf1534515c4beb
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/3d3b0bc239cd9c6e8c65ae26bdcf1534515c4beb.dif
https://github.com/slydiman updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
>From f2064da30ae1d4dae4f04587e97ee0fdc82eb734 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dmitry Vasilyev
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 21:38:12 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [lldb] Disable find-module.test in case of a remote
target
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
Test that we correctly find a PE/COFF file in our executable search path, and
use it when opening minidumps.
+UNSUPPORTED: remote{{.*}}
labath wrote:
```suggestion
XFAIL: remote{{.*}}
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
__
https://github.com/labath edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
labath wrote:
> Considering that there's "REQUIRES: system-windows" on top of the test, maybe
> I'll turn it off for target-linux at all?
This problem is not really linux specific any os!=windows will have the same
problem. I think `REQUIRES: target-windows` would be better.
https://github.c
@@ -508,6 +508,32 @@ StackFrame::GetInScopeVariableList(bool get_file_globals,
ValueObjectSP StackFrame::GetValueForVariableExpressionPath(
llvm::StringRef var_expr, DynamicValueType use_dynamic, uint32_t options,
VariableSP &var_sp, Status &error) {
+ // Check to see
@@ -508,6 +508,32 @@ StackFrame::GetInScopeVariableList(bool get_file_globals,
ValueObjectSP StackFrame::GetValueForVariableExpressionPath(
llvm::StringRef var_expr, DynamicValueType use_dynamic, uint32_t options,
VariableSP &var_sp, Status &error) {
+ // Check to see
@@ -304,6 +304,42 @@ class StackFrame : public ExecutionContextScope,
///
/// \return
/// A shared pointer to the ValueObject described by var_expr.
+ lldb::ValueObjectSP LegacyGetValueForVariableExpressionPath(
+ llvm::StringRef var_expr, lldb::DynamicValueType
https://github.com/cmtice updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115666
>From d757bf7ac49d504707e39fe6f3a0bc93da5aef30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Caroline Tice
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 10:07:22 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [LLDB] Add framework for Data Inspection Language (DIL)
work
anatawa12 wrote:
> I'm less sure about this one. Is that due to the breakpoint exception somehow
> remaining "pending" and that we need to clear/ignore/suppress it before
> detaching?
Sorry I don't know the reason of this behavior, but not calling corresponding
ContinueDebugEvent for WaitForD
@@ -288,8 +288,15 @@ Status ScriptedProcess::DoGetMemoryRegionInfo(lldb::addr_t
load_addr,
MemoryRegionInfo ®ion) {
Status error;
if (auto region_or_err =
- GetInterface().GetMemoryRegionContainingAddress(load_addr, er
jimingham wrote:
> FWIW, I also think that having "continue" go sometimes backwards would be
> very confusing. If we only have forward execution, then the difference
> between "run forwards" and "resume the current thread plan (forwards)" is not
> big. However, the difference between "run forw
@@ -407,6 +406,15 @@ CompileUnit *Function::GetCompileUnit() { return
m_comp_unit; }
const CompileUnit *Function::GetCompileUnit() const { return m_comp_unit; }
+Address Function::GetAddress() const {
+ if (m_ranges.empty())
+return Address();
+ // We're using a (DWARF
https://github.com/jasonmolenda edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115382
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -157,6 +157,12 @@ let Definition = "target" in {
DefaultEnumValue<"eX86DisFlavorDefault">,
EnumValues<"OptionEnumValues(g_x86_dis_flavor_value_types)">,
Desc<"The default disassembly flavor to use for x86 or x86-64 targets.">;
+ def DisassemblyCPU: Property<"dis
https://github.com/jasonmolenda approved this pull request.
LGTM, simple mechanical update. Apologies for not looking at the earlier PR
for discontiguous range Functions.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115836
___
lldb-commits mailing list
@@ -157,6 +157,12 @@ let Definition = "target" in {
DefaultEnumValue<"eX86DisFlavorDefault">,
EnumValues<"OptionEnumValues(g_x86_dis_flavor_value_types)">,
Desc<"The default disassembly flavor to use for x86 or x86-64 targets.">;
+ def DisassemblyCPU: Property<"dis
https://github.com/JDevlieghere approved this pull request.
LGTM.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116089
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/jasonmolenda approved this pull request.
LGTM, this is surely fallout from the 80 column reformat of '16, where these
tables used to have standard column positions (and very long lines).
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116089
___
slydiman wrote:
It is the last show stopper
https://lab.llvm.org/staging/#/builders/197/builds/289
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb
Author: Dave Lee (kastiglione)
Changes
Automatic formatting has removed the utility of these comments.
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116089.diff
10 Files Affected:
- (modified) lldb/source/Plugins/ABI/ARM/ABIMacOSX_ar
https://github.com/ashgti closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115948
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
Author: John Harrison
Date: 2024-11-13T11:17:50-08:00
New Revision: a6d299ddb9398e4641b23ce5c549ca5285dd2ef2
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a6d299ddb9398e4641b23ce5c549ca5285dd2ef2
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a6d299ddb9398e4641b23ce5c549ca5285dd2ef2.diff
https://github.com/ashgti closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116045
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
Author: John Harrison
Date: 2024-11-13T11:17:07-08:00
New Revision: c658d07c4f8210555473c5721e1302f00f9fd25b
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c658d07c4f8210555473c5721e1302f00f9fd25b
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c658d07c4f8210555473c5721e1302f00f9fd25b.diff
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff b0a4e958e85784cff46303c92b6a3a14b20fa1d8
aadf21dddfd0f053956b93cd431272e3f237d646 --e
https://github.com/walter-erquinigo approved this pull request.
thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116045
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/walter-erquinigo approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115948
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/kastiglione created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116089
Automatic formatting has removed the utility of these comments.
>From ae7f7d7e2167743f68118d1342cdb907ad478a95 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dave Lee
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 10:24:38 -0800
Subject: [PATCH]
https://github.com/jasonmolenda updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115963
>From f8f1d70d1d9eac6d36c0fa84e2a94c032385da39 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Molenda
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 15:55:15 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [lldb] Handle an empty SBMemoryRegionInfo from scripted
https://github.com/slydiman ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/slydiman reopened
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94165
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
https://github.com/dzhidzhoev edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115722
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
dzhidzhoev wrote:
> If I understand correctly this is building the test on Linux and running it
> on Windows.
>
> And it seems that the output is in fact better this way? Can't complain about
> that.
No, it's the opposite, we're running on Windows host and Linux target.
> And if I had to g
Author: Vladislav Dzhidzhoev
Date: 2024-11-13T18:49:32+01:00
New Revision: 0afdac41ceb9567c2f953092d0e8b6220c15acea
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0afdac41ceb9567c2f953092d0e8b6220c15acea
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0afdac41ceb9567c2f953092d0e8b6220c15ace
https://github.com/dzhidzhoev closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115722
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
labath wrote:
Just one more clarification. I'm sorry for this takes so long, but I'm not
familiar with the windows debugging API, which means that I might not be
getting some of the things that are obvious. I just want to make sure I
understand what's happening here.
> The first bug is the pr
@@ -169,6 +169,38 @@ Status ProcessWindows::DoDetach(bool keep_stopped) {
Log *log = GetLog(WindowsLog::Process);
StateType private_state = GetPrivateState();
if (private_state != eStateExited && private_state != eStateDetached) {
+if (!keep_stopped) {
+ // if th
@@ -169,6 +169,38 @@ Status ProcessWindows::DoDetach(bool keep_stopped) {
Log *log = GetLog(WindowsLog::Process);
StateType private_state = GetPrivateState();
if (private_state != eStateExited && private_state != eStateDetached) {
+if (!keep_stopped) {
+ // if th
https://github.com/labath created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116068
I ran into this while look at a different bug (patch coming soon). This
function has only two callers. The first is SBTypeStaticField::GetName (which
doesn't care about templates), and the other is
CompilerDecl
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb
Author: Pavel Labath (labath)
Changes
I ran into this while look at a different bug (patch coming soon). This
function has only two callers. The first is SBTypeStaticField::GetName (which
doesn't care about templates), and the other is
CompilerDe
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ def run_test_evaluate_expressions(
if context == "repl":
# In the repl context expressions may be interpreted as lldb
# commands since no variables have the same name as the command.
-self.assertEvaluate("var", r"\
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ def run_test_evaluate_expressions(
if context == "repl":
# In the repl context expressions may be interpreted as lldb
# commands since no variables have the same name as the command.
-self.assertEvaluate("var", r"\
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb
Author: John Harrison (ashgti)
Changes
Previously this used `var` as both an lldb command and variable in the source
to validate the behavior of the 'auto' repl mode. However, `var` seems to
occasionally fail in the CI test when attempting to prin
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ def run_test_evaluate_expressions(
if context == "repl":
# In the repl context expressions may be interpreted as lldb
# commands since no variables have the same name as the command.
-self.assertEvaluate("var", r"\
https://github.com/ashgti edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116045
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ def run_test_evaluate_expressions(
if context == "repl":
# In the repl context expressions may be interpreted as lldb
# commands since no variables have the same name as the command.
-self.assertEvaluate("var", r"\
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ def run_test_evaluate_expressions(
if context == "repl":
# In the repl context expressions may be interpreted as lldb
# commands since no variables have the same name as the command.
-self.assertEvaluate("var", r"\
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ def run_test_evaluate_expressions(
if context == "repl":
# In the repl context expressions may be interpreted as lldb
# commands since no variables have the same name as the command.
-self.assertEvaluate("var", r"\
https://github.com/Michael137 commented:
Thanks for the quick fix. I'll let @walter-erquinigo give the final approval
here as the original author of this test.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116045
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits
https://github.com/ashgti created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116045
Previously this used `var` as both an lldb command and variable in the source
to validate the behavior of the 'auto' repl mode. However, `var` seems to
occasionally fail in the CI test when attempting to print s
https://github.com/ashgti ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116045
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -169,6 +169,38 @@ Status ProcessWindows::DoDetach(bool keep_stopped) {
Log *log = GetLog(WindowsLog::Process);
StateType private_state = GetPrivateState();
if (private_state != eStateExited && private_state != eStateDetached) {
+if (!keep_stopped) {
+ // if th
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb
Author: Stefan Gränitz (weliveindetail)
Changes
This test checks the thread backtrace for entries of intermediate frames that
aren't aligned to 16 bytes. In order to do that, it sets a single breakpoint
and makes sure we stop there. It seems suffi
https://github.com/weliveindetail ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115318
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
anatawa12 wrote:
> Can you explain what's the difference between them?
Sorry for confusion. I'll explain two bugs cleanly.
First of all, both bug must be fixed to pass `TestDetachResumes` test.
The first bug is the process may freeze in Suspended state on detaching process.
This bug is tracked
https://github.com/labath edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115963
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -304,6 +304,42 @@ class StackFrame : public ExecutionContextScope,
///
/// \return
/// A shared pointer to the ValueObject described by var_expr.
+ lldb::ValueObjectSP LegacyGetValueForVariableExpressionPath(
+ llvm::StringRef var_expr, lldb::DynamicValueType
https://github.com/labath approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115666
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -4385,6 +4385,27 @@ bool TargetProperties::GetInjectLocalVariables(
.value_or(true);
}
+bool TargetProperties::GetUseDIL(ExecutionContext *exe_ctx) const {
+ const Property *exp_property =
+ m_collection_sp->GetPropertyAtIndex(ePropertyExperimental, exe_ctx);
+
Michael137 wrote:
LLDB changes LGTM, thanks!
The `tools/lldb-dap/evaluate/TestDAP_evaluate.py` is unrelated to this PR and
has been failing on other PRs too. So feel free to merge if the libc++ changes
are good to go
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115517
___
https://github.com/philnik777 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115517
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
Author: Peng Liu
Date: 2024-11-13T11:08:08+01:00
New Revision: c7df10643bda4acdc9a02406a2eee8aa4ced747f
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c7df10643bda4acdc9a02406a2eee8aa4ced747f
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c7df10643bda4acdc9a02406a2eee8aa4ced747f.diff
LOG:
@@ -508,6 +508,32 @@ StackFrame::GetInScopeVariableList(bool get_file_globals,
ValueObjectSP StackFrame::GetValueForVariableExpressionPath(
llvm::StringRef var_expr, DynamicValueType use_dynamic, uint32_t options,
VariableSP &var_sp, Status &error) {
+ // Check to see
@@ -508,6 +508,32 @@ StackFrame::GetInScopeVariableList(bool get_file_globals,
ValueObjectSP StackFrame::GetValueForVariableExpressionPath(
llvm::StringRef var_expr, DynamicValueType use_dynamic, uint32_t options,
VariableSP &var_sp, Status &error) {
+ // Check to see
https://github.com/labath commented:
Thank you for looking into this. So, from what I was able to gather, there are
two issues/bugs here, but I'm having trouble figuring out what they are. Can
you explain what's the difference between them? I'm trying to figure out if we
can/should have a sepa
@@ -169,6 +169,38 @@ Status ProcessWindows::DoDetach(bool keep_stopped) {
Log *log = GetLog(WindowsLog::Process);
StateType private_state = GetPrivateState();
if (private_state != eStateExited && private_state != eStateDetached) {
+if (!keep_stopped) {
+ // if th
labath wrote:
FWIW, I also think that having "continue" go sometimes backwards would be very
confusing. If we only have forward execution, then the difference between "run
forwards" and "resume the current thread plan (forwards)" is not big. However,
the difference between "run forwards" and "
https://github.com/labath edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115712
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -288,8 +288,15 @@ Status ScriptedProcess::DoGetMemoryRegionInfo(lldb::addr_t
load_addr,
MemoryRegionInfo ®ion) {
Status error;
if (auto region_or_err =
- GetInterface().GetMemoryRegionContainingAddress(load_addr, er
Author: Pavel Labath
Date: 2024-11-13T09:56:00+01:00
New Revision: 39b2979a434e70a4ce76d4adf91572dcfc9662ff
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/39b2979a434e70a4ce76d4adf91572dcfc9662ff
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/39b2979a434e70a4ce76d4adf91572dcfc9662ff.diff
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+#include "artificial_location.h"
+
+int A::foo() {
+#line 0
labath wrote:
Thanks for the pointer. Quite a coincidence that I end up touching the same
test just as Jaremy ends up breaking it :P
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115876
__
@@ -56,8 +56,19 @@ DWARFASTParser::ParseChildArrayInfo(const DWARFDIE
&parent_die,
if (auto frame = exe_ctx->GetFrameSP()) {
Status error;
lldb::VariableSP var_sp;
- auto valobj_sp = frame->GetValueForVariabl
https://github.com/cmtice updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115666
>From d757bf7ac49d504707e39fe6f3a0bc93da5aef30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Caroline Tice
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 10:07:22 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [LLDB] Add framework for Data Inspection Language (DIL)
work
https://github.com/labath closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115876
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
labath wrote:
That might make more sense, but looking at the bot, it really does seem to run
on windows, with a remote target (I guess it doesn't really run the binary
there, it must fall back to host when it find the binary is not compatible).
And if I had to guess, I'd say that all of this p
DhruvSrivastavaX wrote:
Hi @labath ,
I agree that we can put a hold on this one for now.
But on that note, we want to start integrating multiple plugins Parallely, but
Systematically,
to make the upstreaming pick up some pace and also be in order.
Keeping that in mind, I think right now, the b
80 matches
Mail list logo
