Why not? Just because llvm isn't building support for targeting some architecture doesn't mean lldb shouldn't be able to debug those architectures. We could add a similar LLDB specific define, but using llvm's seems wrong On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 6:13 PM Vedant Kumar via lldb-commits < lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> vsk created this revision. > vsk added a reviewer: jasonmolenda. > vsk added a subscriber: lldb-commits. > Herald added a subscriber: mgorny. > > Should fix: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30928 > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D26338 > > Files: > unittests/UnwindAssembly/CMakeLists.txt > unittests/UnwindAssembly/InstEmulation/CMakeLists.txt > > > Index: unittests/UnwindAssembly/InstEmulation/CMakeLists.txt > =================================================================== > --- unittests/UnwindAssembly/InstEmulation/CMakeLists.txt > +++ unittests/UnwindAssembly/InstEmulation/CMakeLists.txt > @@ -1 +1,3 @@ > -add_lldb_unittest(InstEmulationTests TestArm64InstEmulation.cpp) > +if ("AArch64" IN_LIST LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD) > + add_lldb_unittest(InstEmulationTests TestArm64InstEmulation.cpp) > +endif() > Index: unittests/UnwindAssembly/CMakeLists.txt > =================================================================== > --- unittests/UnwindAssembly/CMakeLists.txt > +++ unittests/UnwindAssembly/CMakeLists.txt > @@ -1,2 +1,5 @@ > -add_subdirectory(x86) > +if ("X86" IN_LIST LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD) > + add_subdirectory(x86) > +endif() > + > add_subdirectory(InstEmulation) > > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-commits mailing list > lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits >
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits