labath added a comment. The presence of `llvm_unreachable` here is questionable, but I am surprised that this comes up in the context of reproducers. If the reproducers cause this function to be called with a different ArchSpec, then it sounds like there are bigger problems that need to be solved..
If we do want to do something about the crash, then I think we ought to just remove the `llvm_unreachable`. I don't think it makes sense to bail out on invalid ArchSpecs, but blow up on not-yet-supported architectures. If anything, I would say it should be the opposite -- I don't think it makes sense for anyone to call this function with an invalid/empty ArchSpec, but it may be reasonable to enable some degraded behavior for architectures which are not fully supported. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D78588/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D78588 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
