llunak added a comment. In D122974#3567278 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122974#3567278>, @dblaikie wrote:
>> Then I still don't know what the problem is supposed to be. If the StringMap >> hash implementation ever changes, the necessary LLDB rebuild will detect >> this, the relevant LLDB parts will get adjusted and problem solved. > > What I mean is if the cache is used across statically linked versions - eg: > cache is created, someone installs an update to lldb, then the cache is read > back and misinterprets the hashes in the cache if the hash algorithm had > changed between versions. That is not going to happen, that updated LLDB will be using a different cache version. That's what the part you're replying to means. You cannot have two LLDB builds using the same cache version but different hash implementations, as long as you do not ignore LLDB unittests failing. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D122974/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D122974 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
