jingham accepted this revision as: jingham.
jingham added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks good to me.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D51816
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/c
ted updated this revision to Diff 164533.
ted added a comment.
Added a test to TestAddressBreakpoints.py that sets an address breakpoint
before launch, launches, and checks to see if the breakpoint was hit.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D51816
Files:
include/lldb/Core/Address.h
packages/Python
ted added a comment.
Yes, I'll add a new test to TestAddressBreakpoints.py.
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D51816
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commi
davide added a comment.
Can you add a test for this behavior?
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D51816
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
ted created this revision.
ted added reviewers: jingham, LLDB.
Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
An address breakpoint of the form "b 0x1000" won't resolve if it's created
while the process isn't running. This patch deletes Address::SectionWasDeleted,
renames Address::SectionWasDeletedPri
