================
@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+//===--- DirectToIndirectFCR.h - RISC-V specific pass
---------------------===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
+//
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+#pragma once
+
+#include "lldb/lldb-types.h"
+
+#include "llvm/IR/Instructions.h"
+#include "llvm/Pass.h"
+
+namespace lldb_private {
+
+class ExecutionContext;
+
+// During the lldb expression execution lldb wraps a user expression, jittes
+// fabricated code and then puts it into the stack memory. Thus, if user tried
----------------
jasonmolenda wrote:
I don't think this is quite true. lldb asks the remote stub to allocate memory
with read+write permissions for storing the arguments, and read+execute
permissions for the jitted code, e.g.
```
(lldb) p (int)isdigit('1')
< 13> send packet: $_M1000,rx#83
< 13> read packet: $100008000#00
< 13> send packet: $_M1000,rw#82
< 13> read packet: $10000c000#00
```
It would be surprising (to me) if the stub returned memory regions on the
stack, because lldb is allowed to reuse these regions throughout the debug
session, and we can't have the inferior process overwriting them.
You are correct that the allocated regions may be too far from the function(s)
they'll need to call, and the same problem you describe below could exist. I
don't mean to focus on the "stack memory" part of this, but I think it will
confuse people when they read it.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99336
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
