[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58860: [build.py] Allow clang-cl to build files starting with '/U'

xiaobai created this revision. xiaobai added reviewers: zturner, labath. Herald added a reviewer: serge-sans-paille. clang-cl tries to match cl's interface, and treats /U as "Removes a predefined macro" as cl does. When you feed clang-cl a file that begins with '/U' (e.g. /Users/xiaobai/foo.c),

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58856: Delete dead code

aprantl created this revision. aprantl added reviewers: clayborg, jingham. This isn't used anywhere and since we have version control, I don't see a reason to keep it around. https://reviews.llvm.org/D58856 Files: lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp Index:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

aprantl updated this revision to Diff 189003. aprantl added a comment. Removed DIEStack from this patch it distracts. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838 Files: lldb/source/Target/ExecutionContext.cpp Index:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL355249: [Reproducers] Capture and replay interpreter commands. (authored by JDevlieghere, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

JDevlieghere added a comment. Addressed in commit. Thank you Pavel! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58564/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58564 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r355249 - [Reproducers] Capture and replay interpreter commands.

Author: jdevlieghere Date: Fri Mar 1 16:20:26 2019 New Revision: 355249 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=355249=rev Log: [Reproducers] Capture and replay interpreter commands. This patch adds the necessary logic to capture and replay commands entered into the command interpreter. A

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

jingham added a comment. In D58838#1415646 , @aprantl wrote: > In D58838#1415637 , @zturner wrote: > > > Yea it would be nice if we could remove all of the `LLDB_CONFIGURATION_xxx` > > macros and just use either

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

jingham added a comment. In D58792#1415645 , @clayborg wrote: > In D58792#1415629 , @zturner wrote: > > > Out of curiosity, are there known, specific examples of users who rely on > > the exact mangling not

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

aprantl added a comment. Also I should note that we can only use LLVM defines that are provided by the Xcode project until we reach the point where Apple builds LLDB with CMake and the CMake-generated Xcode file is good enough to replace the hand-written one. This is a transitional

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

aprantl added a comment. In D58838#1415637 , @zturner wrote: > Yea it would be nice if we could remove all of the `LLDB_CONFIGURATION_xxx` > macros and just use either the LLVM ones or standard ones such as NDEBUG I generally agree with this, but we

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

clayborg added a comment. In D58792#1415629 , @zturner wrote: > Out of curiosity, are there known, specific examples of users who rely on the > exact mangling not changing? yes. Xcode. For Swift, Xcode runs the LLDBRPC.framework in process which runs

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

jingham added a comment. In D58792#1415629 , @zturner wrote: > Out of curiosity, are there known, specific examples of users who rely on the > exact mangling not changing? Yes, both Xcode and lldb-rpc-server (an out-of-process dingus we made for

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

zturner added a comment. Yea it would be nice if we could remove all of the `LLDB_CONFIGURATION_xxx` macros and just use either the LLVM ones or standard ones such as NDEBUG CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58167: Refactor user/group name resolving code

jingham added a comment. This is fine by me, though Greg I think still had an outstanding question. If he's satisfied, I am. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58167/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58167 ___ lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

clayborg added a comment. If this is new API I guess it is ok to have them all be const. I was mostly worried that you wouldn't be able to call a non const function from a const function. Do we have any IsValid() calls that are const? I believe we do. If so, how are we calling IsValid() if it

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

zturner added a comment. Out of curiosity, are there known, specific examples of users who rely on the exact mangling not changing? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58792/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58792 ___ lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r355238 - Delete commented-out code.

Author: adrian Date: Fri Mar 1 14:30:31 2019 New Revision: 355238 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=355238=rev Log: Delete commented-out code. Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Host/common/ProcessRunLock.cpp Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Host/common/ProcessRunLock.cpp URL:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

shafik added a comment. In D58792#1415390 , @clayborg wrote: > In D58792#1414964 , @labath wrote: > > > In D58792#1414191 , @shafik wrote: > > > > > It stood out to me that

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

aprantl added a comment. This doesn't apply to DieStack since it isn't an assert, but DieStack is dead code anyway... CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

aprantl added a comment. But I'm sure that `LLDB_CONFIGURATION_BUILD_AND_INTEGRATION` also defines `NDEBUG` so the assert should be a noop, right? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58842: Move ProcessInstanceInfo and similar to Utility

zturner added a comment. In D58842#1415526 , @labath wrote: > Hmm.. I think I've thought of (or remembered, because I have been thinking > about Utility too) a reason why it might be better to keep these in Host. > ProcessLaunchInfo cannot be trivially

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

labath updated this revision to Diff 188966. labath added a comment. Give up on constness and make all bool operators non-const. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58792/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58792 Files: include/lldb/API/SBAddress.h include/lldb/API/SBBlock.h

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58842: Move ProcessInstanceInfo and similar to Utility

labath added a comment. Hmm.. I think I've thought of (or remembered, because I have been thinking about Utility too) a reason why it might be better to keep these in Host. ProcessLaunchInfo cannot be trivially moved to Utility (and indeed, in this patch, you are keeping it in Host), because

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58842: Move ProcessInstanceInfo and similar to Utility

labath added a comment. My main reason for creating D58167 was so that this move (*) could be done without leaving the remnants of the Dump function in the form DumpProcessInstance functions in Process.cpp (among other benefits I think that refactoring will

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58748: [ExpressionParser] Test GetClangResourceDir

labath added a reviewer: aprantl. labath added a subscriber: aprantl. labath added a comment. Looks fine to me, but maybe @aprantl could give this a quick look, as he's the one (IIRC) who introduced this function. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58748/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. I have a couple of more comments, including some things I missed on the previous pass, but I don't want to hold this up any more. Feel free to commit after taking the last batch into consideration. Comment at:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

clayborg added a comment. In D58792#1414964 , @labath wrote: > In D58792#1414191 , @shafik wrote: > > > It stood out to me that some of the conversions were not `const` and I can > > see that `IsValid` is not

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58748: [ExpressionParser] Test GetClangResourceDir

xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 188952. xiaobai added a comment. Minor changes to make MacOS work CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58748/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58748 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/paths/TestPaths.py

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58842: Move ProcessInstanceInfo and similar to Utility

zturner created this revision. zturner added reviewers: jingham, labath, JDevlieghere. Herald added subscribers: jdoerfert, mgorny, emaste. There are set of classes in Target that describe the parameters of a process - e.g. it's PID, name, user id, and similar. However, since it is a bare

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

clayborg added a comment. I think we mostly wanted to catch these in the test suite. Probably best to convert to lldbassert CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838 ___ lldb-commits mailing

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

clayborg added a comment. So it affects Apple directly! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. LLDB_CONFIGURATION_BUILD_AND_INTEGRATION doesn't have them. So you can change these to #if !defined(LLDB_CONFIGURATION_BUILD_AND_INTEGRATION) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58630: [lldb] [test] Pass appropriate -L&-Wl, -rpath for just-built libc++

mgorny updated this revision to Diff 188946. mgorny retitled this revision from "[lldb] [test] Pass appropriate -L for just-built libc++" to "[lldb] [test] Pass appropriate -L&-Wl,-rpath for just-built libc++". mgorny edited the summary of this revision. mgorny added a comment. Turns out

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58838: Remove tautological #ifdefs

aprantl created this revision. aprantl added a reviewer: clayborg. These conditions appear to always be true. @clayborg do you remember the reason why these exist? https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838 Files: lldb/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/DWARFASTParserClang.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58833: Fix embedded Python initialization according to changes in version 3.7

zturner added reviewers: davide, stella.stamenova. zturner added a comment. Davide ran into this issue recently and tried to fix it, so I'm adding him here as a reviewer. Also Stella is interested in Python 3 support as well, so adding her also. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58833: Fix embedded Python initialization according to changes in version 3.7

tatyana-krasnukha created this revision. tatyana-krasnukha added reviewers: zturner, jingham. tatyana-krasnukha added a project: LLDB. Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits. The `InitializePythonRAII` left the GIL locked for other threads when using Python >= 3.7. P.S. I'd appreciate any help

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58727: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58394 done right

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rLLDB355213: Resubmit r354706 with a fix for process launch. (authored by jingham, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: teemperor. Changed prior to commit:

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r355213 - Resubmit r354706 with a fix for process launch.

Author: jingham Date: Fri Mar 1 10:13:38 2019 New Revision: 355213 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=355213=rev Log: Resubmit r354706 with a fix for process launch. When the debugger is run in sync mode, you need to be able to tell whether a hijacked resume is for some special

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58727: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58394 done right

jingham added a comment. Excellent, thanks! I didn't think to look there. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58727/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58727 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

JDevlieghere updated this revision to Diff 188932. JDevlieghere marked 3 inline comments as done. JDevlieghere added a comment. - Moved the logic into SBDebugger. - Created DataRecorder factory. - Stored DataRecorder as a field in Debugger. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58727: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58394 done right

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Yes, that did the trick. The new test is passing on linux now as well. Regarding BTW, I see the option to "reopen a revision" in the drop down menu at the bottom of the page (the same one you

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58792: Add "operator bool" to SB APIs

labath added a comment. In D58792#1414191 , @shafik wrote: > It stood out to me that some of the conversions were not `const` and I can > see that `IsValid` is not consistently `const` across the API but after > talking to @jingham it is unfortunately

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D58564: [Reproducers] Add command provider

labath added a comment. In D58564#1414410 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > Thanks Pavel. I've updated the patch with your suggestion. I agree it's a lot > better :-) > > I implemented the logic in the Debugger rather than the SBDebugger because I > think the