mgorny added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/FreeBSD/NativeProcessFreeBSD.cpp:981-987
+ switch (event) {
+ case PL_FLAG_FORKED:
+ case PL_FLAG_FORKED | PL_FLAG_VFORKED:
+ break;
+ default:
+ assert(false && "unknown clone_info.event");
+ }
----------------
labath wrote:
> mgorny wrote:
> > labath wrote:
> > > `assert(event&PL_FLAG_FORKED)` would be shorter, but I am not sure if we
> > > need even that, as this is already checked in the caller. You could just
> > > drop the entire `event` argument, if it is unused..
> > The distinction is necessary to know how to deal with software breakpoints,
> > and it will be used in the followup patch (D99864, when I extend it to
> > non-Linux targets). I think removing `event` at this point to reintroduce
> > it would be a wasted effort.
> >
> > That said, I guess this is yet another case for `llvm_unreachable()`. Also,
> > I think it's worth keeping `assert()`s like this as they make sure we don't
> > break stuff accidentally when changing code on the caller's end.
> True, but it's even better when the code is written such that the
> asserts/unreachables are unnecessary. One way to do that might be to do the
> decoding in the caller:
> ```
> if (info.pl_flags & PL_FLAG_FORKED) {
> MonitorClone(info.pl_child_pid, /*bool is_vfork*/ fork_flags &
> PL_FLAG_VFORKED);
> return;
> }
> ```
> It's hard to say whether that would work without seeing the real
> implementation.
In the long run, we would probably also want a separate event for `posix_spawn`
on NetBSD. I've figured out that reusing native constants avoids reinventing
the wheel unnecessarily.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98822/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98822
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
