abhishek.aggarwal added inline comments. ================ Comment at: test/functionalities/register/TestRegisters.py:195 @@ +194,3 @@ + for x in range(0,16): + self.runCmd ("si", RUN_SUCCEEDED) + ---------------- labath wrote: > First I would like to applaud for writing a test case for such a delicate > issue. I know it's not easy given the current test infrastructure. > > However, this change seems very fragile and likely to break due to random > changes in clang implementation and/or command line flags. Even the gcc path > can break if the gcc happens to produce slightly different output. I would > like to avoid relying on hardcoded instruction counts. > > How about we try something like this: > - in the inline assembly, we prepend the code you want to test with "int3" > - run the inferior normally. it should hit the debugger trap and stop (you > can verify that the stop reason is indeed sigtrap) > - the next instruction should point precisely at the code you want to test, > without relying on any debug info or instruction counts > - proceed with the test normally > > what do you think? Thanks for suggesting a nice way to fix it. I agree with you. I will make the changes.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12677 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits