treapster added a comment. In D127741#3583559 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D127741#3583559>, @DavidSpickett wrote:
> > I agree that objdump should have some kind of "max" setting, even a default. > However there will still need to be a way to test what I referred to. As you said, ` instruction requires bla` is part of assembler, not disassembler, so it is not affected by the patch. The problem here is that tests do `CHECK-UNKNOWN: 83 a9 91 c0 <unknown>` which basically checks that objdump cannot disassemble instruction that was assembled in the very same test. If we change that, we can make `+all` default attribute for objdump and it will disassemble everything the same way GNU objdump and lldb do. > What might be possible is to write the testing such that it doesn't use > llvm-objdump. I haven't seen the structure of the tests perhaps this would > mean duplicating tests all over the place. Why not use objdump? If we only check that instructions get disassembled, it will work fine. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D127741/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D127741 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
