labath added a comment.
Couldn't we just update the cpp file to do
#ifndef PR_MPX_ENABLE_MANAGEMENT
return -1;
#endif
?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32719
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
Author: labath
Date: Tue May 2 04:00:52 2017
New Revision: 301903
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=301903&view=rev
Log:
Remove unused code related to CPlusPlusLanguage::FindEquivalentNames
Summary: It is simply unused, and the header for it is private, so there should
be no external
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL301903: Remove unused code related to
CPlusPlusLanguage::FindEquivalentNames (authored by labath).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32503?vs=96623&id=97408#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
labath added subscribers: jingham, labath.
labath added a comment.
Thanks for the patch. Could you also write a test case for the bug? It sounds
like all that is necessary is to move the commands from your commit message
into a test.
Jim, who would be a good reviewer for this?
Repository:
r
labath added a comment.
I am having trouble applying this. Do you need to rebase or something?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32708
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/lis
nitesh.jain updated this revision to Diff 97415.
nitesh.jain added a comment.
Update diff as per suggestion.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32168
Files:
include/lldb/API/SBAddress.h
include/lldb/API/SBInstruction.h
include/lldb/API/SBInstructionList.h
include/lldb/Core/Disassembler.h
pack
Author: labath
Date: Tue May 2 05:17:30 2017
New Revision: 301908
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=301908&view=rev
Log:
Change UniqueCStringMap to use ConstString as the key
Summary:
UniqueCStringMap "sorts" the entries for fast lookup, but really it only cares
about uniqueness. Co
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL301908: Change UniqueCStringMap to use ConstString as the
key (authored by labath).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32316?vs=96629&id=97417#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL301917: ObjectFileELF: Fix symbol lookup in bss section
(authored by labath).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32434?vs=96541&id=97435#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.
Author: labath
Date: Tue May 2 07:40:31 2017
New Revision: 301917
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=301917&view=rev
Log:
ObjectFileELF: Fix symbol lookup in bss section
Summary:
If we have symbol information in a separate file, we need to be very
careful about presenting a unified sec
Author: labath
Date: Tue May 2 08:14:45 2017
New Revision: 301918
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=301918&view=rev
Log:
Android.rules: set "ar" path correctly
Modified:
lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/make/Android.rules
Modified: lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/te
fjricci added a comment.
Yeah, that works too, just wasn't sure which way was preferred.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32719
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
fjricci updated this revision to Diff 97447.
fjricci added a comment.
Move checks into cpp files
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32719
Files:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/register/intel_xtended_registers/main.cpp
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/register/intel_xt
labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
I don't like either of the solutions too much, but this one is at least less
code. :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32719
___
lldb-commits mailing l
jingham accepted this revision.
jingham added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks good, thanks!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32168
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
scott.smith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32708#743161, @labath wrote:
> I am having trouble applying this. Do you need to rebase or something?
It was based on another commit that you committed for me, but committed after
trying to commit this one. It should apply now that you
labath created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
This adds a couple of unit tests to the MainLoop class. To get the
kqueue based version of the signal handling passing, I needed to
modify the implementation a bit to make the queue object persistent.
Otherwise, only the signals whic
scott.smith created this revision.
Many parallel tasks just want to iterate over all the possible numbers from 0
to N-1. Rather than enqueue N work items, instead just "map" the function
across the requested integer space.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757
Files:
inclu
scott.smith added a comment.
IMO, this is a simpler interface than TaskRunner. Also, after this, there are
no users of TaskRunner left. Should I just delete them?
I did this change to help parallel symbol demangling (to come in a separate
patch). Rather than have the symbol demangler use bat
clayborg requested changes to this revision.
clayborg added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743567, @scott.smith wrote:
> IMO, this is a simpler interface than TaskRunner. Also, after this, there
> are no users of TaskRunner left. Sh
clayborg added a comment.
And note in the DWARF parser you can't add the expensive code that aggregates
all of the data into the SymbolFileDWARF into "parser_fn" because only on
thread can be putting stuff into SymbolFileDWARF at a time.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757
scott.smith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743657, @clayborg wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743567, @scott.smith wrote:
>
> > IMO, this is a simpler interface than TaskRunner. Also, after this, there
> > are no users of TaskRunner left. Should I just delete th
zturner requested changes to this revision.
zturner added a comment.
I would suggest putting this in LLVM, as something liek this:
namespace llvm {
template
void parallel_apply(Range &&R, Func &&F) {
// enqueue items here.
// wait for all tasks to complete.
}
}
Repository:
r
clayborg added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743669, @scott.smith wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743657, @clayborg wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743567, @scott.smith wrote:
> >
> > > IMO, this is a simpler interface than TaskRunner. Also, after this
scott.smith added a comment.
I can make more measurements on this.
Comment at: source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/SymbolFileDWARF.cpp:1994
-TaskRunner task_runner;
-for (uint32_t cu_idx = 0; cu_idx < num_compile_units; ++cu_idx)
- task_runner.AddTask(parser_fn, cu_i
scott.smith marked 6 inline comments as done.
scott.smith added a comment.
IMO the vector append issue doesn't matter, because the very next thing we do
is sort. Sorting is more expensive than appending, so the append is noise.
Comment at: source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/Symb
scott.smith updated this revision to Diff 97494.
scott.smith marked 2 inline comments as done.
scott.smith added a comment.
change name to TaskRunOverint
remove TaskRunner
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757
Files:
include/lldb/Utility/TaskPool.h
source/Plugins/SymbolFile
zturner added a comment.
s/instead of LLVM/instead of LLDB/
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
zturner requested changes to this revision.
zturner added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Not to sound like a broken record, but please try to put this in LLVM instead
of LLVM. I suggested a convenient function signature earlier.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews
scott.smith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743796, @zturner wrote:
> s/instead of LLVM/instead of LLDB/
I hear you, but IMO it's not ready for that yet.
1. It would depend on ThreadPool, but
2. LLDB hasn't switched to ThreadPool yet, because
3. I want to figure out how to
Then make it ready :-/
Why does LLDB need llvm::ThreadPool for this to work? I proposed a single
function that is not dependent on any particular instance of a thread pool.
template
void parallel_for_each(Range &&R, Func &&F) {
// call F(Index, *Iter) for every item in R.
}
std::vector Foos
clayborg added a comment.
So I don't see where you moved all of the .Append functions. And if you did
your timings with them not being in there then your timings are off.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757
___
lldb-commits maili
clayborg added a comment.
I know no one is using TaskRunner, but I would rather not remove it just yet.
It has the possibility of being useful. Not in this case, but in general. I'd
be interested in hearing what Pavel and Tamas think? None of this affects LLDB
on Mac because all Darwin (macOS,
scott.smith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743874, @clayborg wrote:
> So I don't see where you moved all of the .Append functions. And if you did
> your timings with them not being in there then your timings are off.
finalize_fn calls Append on each source first, then call
Recently I started seeing a build error from a tree that has lldb in it;
I don't know whether the problem is my configuration, or Ubuntu, or gcc,
or what, but gcc complains that it can't convert 'int' to 'sigset_t' on
the return statement.
This naïve one-liner fixes it, although I don't know any
Author: spyffe
Date: Tue May 2 19:41:43 2017
New Revision: 301993
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=301993&view=rev
Log:
Fixed a bug where we did not properly use the complete versions of Objective-C
classes.
Also added a test case, thanks to Greg Clayton.
Added:
lldb/trunk/pac
vbalu updated this revision to Diff 97550.
vbalu added a comment.
Corrected the code. Now this test will fail without
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32271 patch.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32522
Files:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/process_attach/TestProcessAttach.py
Index:
pa
Can you rewrite the exe path computation to use os.path.join so we're not
assuming posix syntax?
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:11 PM vignesh balu via Phabricator via
lldb-commits wrote:
> vbalu updated this revision to Diff 97550.
> vbalu added a comment.
>
> Corrected the code. Now this test will fa
xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 97553.
xiaobai added a comment.
Updating per @labath's suggestions
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32421
Files:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/print/TestPrintEmptyExpressionList.py
source/Host/common/Editline.cpp
Index: source/Host/common/E
39 matches
Mail list logo
