bgianfo updated this revision to Diff 100047.
bgianfo marked an inline comment as done.
bgianfo added a comment.
Address Pavel/Jim/Greg's feedback with the addition of a new test.
I followed Jim's advice and extended the existing num_threads suite
so that we start more thread3's. The new test_uni
ravitheja updated this revision to Diff 100051.
ravitheja added a comment.
Running clang-format.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32585
Files:
docs/lldb-gdb-remote.txt
include/lldb/API/SBTrace.h
include/lldb/Core/TraceOptions.h
include/lldb/Host/common/NativeProcessProtocol.h
include/lldb/Ta
labath added a comment.
thank you
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33283
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
labath added a comment.
What was your decision on the core files? I was under the impression you were
gonna add the zip files as well. If so, then they should go in at the same time.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32149
___
lldb-c
Please put it as review in Phabricator so others can comment too. I am
wondering how we can test this behaviour.
One can use -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables with clang to disable generation of
.eh_frame but the startup code
still brings in that section.
You also need to run clang-format to ma
labath added a comment.
Thanks for writing the test. We just need to make sure it runs in a stable
manner.
Comment at:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/thread/num_threads/TestNumThreads.py:91
+# thread3 function. All of these threads should show as one s
labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
Looks good as far as I am concerned (please wait for greg's ok though)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32585
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
Author: labath
Date: Wed May 24 04:46:48 2017
New Revision: 303732
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=303732&view=rev
Log:
RunThreadPlan: Fix halting logic in IgnoreBreakpoints = false
Summary:
The function had logic to handle the case when the expression terminated
while we were trying
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL303732: RunThreadPlan: Fix halting logic in
IgnoreBreakpoints = false (authored by labath).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33283?vs=99435&id=100058#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https:
labath added a comment.
that sounds like an excellent idea, as it will check all executed commands, and
not the ones we've remembered checking. It should probably be an `lldbassert`
though. (And we'd need to check that the existing tests still pass after that.)
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://r
Author: labath
Date: Wed May 24 06:57:28 2017
New Revision: 303740
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=303740&view=rev
Log:
Revert "RunThreadPlan: Fix halting logic in IgnoreBreakpoints = false"
This reverts commit r303732, as it introduces a regression in
TestLoadUnload on android.
Mod
krytarowski added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32149#763008, @labath wrote:
> What was your decision on the core files? I was under the impression you were
> gonna add the zip files as well. If so, then they should go in at the same
> time.
In the same commit? If so I will try to a
labath reopened this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Reopening for a re-review of a fix.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33283
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.
labath updated this revision to Diff 100099.
labath added a comment.
Fixed version.
The original patch caused a regression in TestLoadUnload, which has only showed
up when running the remote test suite. The problem there was that we interrupted
the target just as it has hit the rendezvous breakpo
labath requested review of this revision.
labath added a comment.
Let me know what you think of the fix, and please confirm whether the ignoring
of the breakpoint condition is a bug.
thanks.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33283
___
lldb-commits mailing
abhishek.aggarwal updated this revision to Diff 100108.
abhishek.aggarwal marked 9 inline comments as done.
abhishek.aggarwal added a comment.
Updating https://reviews.llvm.org/D33434: Added new API to SBStructuredData
class
- Made changes according to feedback
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33434
abhishek.aggarwal added a comment.
My comments are inlined. Please let me know if something still needs to be
changed.
Comment at: include/lldb/API/SBStructuredData.h:60
+ //--
+ size_t GetSize() const;
+
--
clayborg accepted this revision.
clayborg added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
If all R"( strings are under 80 characters, this is good to go. If not, just
fix and submit, no extra review needed.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32585
___
clayborg requested changes to this revision.
clayborg added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
No need for the "StructuredDataType::" or "lldb::StructuredDataType::"
prefixes. Since we aren't using an enum class (it was before) and since all
enumerators start with "eStruct
labath added inline comments.
Comment at:
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/python_api/sbstructureddata/TestStructuredDataAPI.py:43
+# Now launch the process, and do not stop at entry point.
+process = target.LaunchSimple(
+None, None, self.get_process_w
jafl added a comment.
Thanks for the suggestions. I will get around to this - just swamped right now!
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32366
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
Formatting is done.
Created D33504, and it is accepted now, but what should I do next (I haven’t
commit access)?
Thanks,
Tatyana
From: Abid, Hafiz [mailto:hafiz_a...@mentor.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 24 May, 2017 12:37 PM
To: Tatyana Krasnukha ;
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [Lldb-commits
jingham accepted this revision.
jingham added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
The fix seems good.
The fact that a breakpoint hit while evaluating an expression doesn't check the
condition is a known limitation.
You've got to protect against artificial recursions in h
jmajors updated this revision to Diff 100151.
jmajors added a comment.
Added m_ prefix to member variables.
Converted lldb-server start to single thread.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32930
Files:
unittests/CMakeLists.txt
unittests/tools/CMakeLists.txt
unittests/tools/lldb-server/CMakeLists.t
jmajors updated this revision to Diff 100178.
jmajors added a comment.
Format changes.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32930
Files:
unittests/CMakeLists.txt
unittests/tools/CMakeLists.txt
unittests/tools/lldb-server/CMakeLists.txt
unittests/tools/lldb-server/inferior/thread_inferior.cpp
uni
Author: kamil
Date: Wed May 24 18:59:50 2017
New Revision: 303823
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=303823&view=rev
Log:
Correct compiler warnings and Debug build of the NetBSD target
Correct files present only in the NetBSD build.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/Process/NetBS
Author: jingham
Date: Wed May 24 21:24:18 2017
New Revision: 303832
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=303832&view=rev
Log:
Fix the warning when you pass -c to step/next/si/ni.
During some cleanup the test for whether the thread plan
accepted an iteration count was reversed, so we give
27 matches
Mail list logo
