[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60172: Renamed Target::GetSharedModule to AddModule, allow for ModulesDidLoad to be delayed when batch adding Modules

jasonmolenda updated this revision to Diff 194000. jasonmolenda added a comment. Added a testcase, TestModuleLoadedNotifys. Renamed the pure virtual notifier methods in ModuleList to add 'Notify' at the start of their names, updated the names in subclass Target as well. Added a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60340: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rLLDB357829: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable. (authored by adrian, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: abidh. Changed prior to commit:

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357829 - Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable.

Author: adrian Date: Fri Apr 5 15:43:42 2019 New Revision: 357829 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357829=rev Log: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable. Since these timeouts guard against catastrophic error in debugserver, I also increased all of them to

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60340: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable.

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60340/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60340 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357824 - [testsuite] Split Objective-C new syntax test

Author: jdevlieghere Date: Fri Apr 5 15:06:53 2019 New Revision: 357824 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357824=rev Log: [testsuite] Split Objective-C new syntax test This splits the second longest test into separate test cases. Similar to what we did for the Objective-C data

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60340: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable.

aprantl updated this revision to Diff 193975. aprantl added a comment. Tweaked the name of the option after some off-line discussion with Jim. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60340/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60340 Files: lldb/include/lldb/Target/Process.h

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60340: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable.

aprantl added a comment. I should also note that I did check that process was either checked or dereferenced above the the locations where this patch dereferences it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60340/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60340: Unify random timeouts throughout LLDB and make them configurable.

aprantl created this revision. aprantl added a reviewer: jingham. Herald added subscribers: kubamracek, emaste. Herald added a project: LLDB. Since these timeouts guard against catastrophic error in debugserver, I also increased all of them to the maximum value among them. The motivation for

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60180: [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rLLDB357817: [CMake] Dont explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds (authored by xiaobai, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: abidh. Herald added a project: LLDB. Changed prior to commit:

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357817 - [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds

Author: xiaobai Date: Fri Apr 5 14:01:50 2019 New Revision: 357817 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357817=rev Log: [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds Summary: This line is unnecessary because add_llvm_executable will handle linking the correct LLVM

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357813 - [Test] Remove no_debug_info_test decorator from Obj-C data formatters.

Author: jdevlieghere Date: Fri Apr 5 13:37:52 2019 New Revision: 357813 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357813=rev Log: [Test] Remove no_debug_info_test decorator from Obj-C data formatters. As discussed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300. Modified:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60180: [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds

sgraenitz accepted this revision. sgraenitz added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. > you should be using the same sysroot to build LLVM and LLDB. In my specific > problem, when you build any of the lldb tools (e.g. lldb-server) it fails to > link because you are

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60180: [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds

xiaobai added a comment. In D60180#1456263 , @sgraenitz wrote: > > No, everything is being built for android. Cross-compiling lldb-server > > involves cross-compiling llvm libraries, clang libraries, and if you've got > > swift in the picture, swift

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

davide added a comment. In D60300#1456491 , @davide wrote: > In D60300#1456472 , @clayborg wrote: > > > In D60300#1456468 , @JDevlieghere > > wrote: > > > > > In

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

davide added a comment. In D60300#1456472 , @clayborg wrote: > In D60300#1456468 , @JDevlieghere > wrote: > > > In D60300#1455790 , @davide wrote: > > > > > I think this is

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

aprantl added a comment. > What's the motivation behind all the `@no_debug_info_test` decorators? Are > those codepaths guaranteed to be tested elsewhere? As a rule of thumb I'd say, let's only stick `@no_debug_info_test` on tests where a (future) coverage bot proves that it is safe. How does

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

aprantl added a comment. What's the motivation behind all the `@no_debug_info_test` decorators? Are those codepaths guaranteed to be tested elsewhere? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

clayborg added a comment. In D60300#1456468 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > In D60300#1455790 , @davide wrote: > > > I think this is good regardless for readability, but I would really > > appreciate if we can collect

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357787 - Add .noindex to the gitignore

Author: jdevlieghere Date: Fri Apr 5 10:57:42 2019 New Revision: 357787 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357787=rev Log: Add .noindex to the gitignore The .noindex suffix is used on macOS to prevent Spotlight from indexing its contents. These folders contain test output from

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357786 - [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

Author: jdevlieghere Date: Fri Apr 5 10:57:40 2019 New Revision: 357786 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357786=rev Log: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter The testcase for objective-c data formatters is very big as it checks a bunch of stuff. This is annoying when using

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

davide accepted this revision. davide added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. great! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

Nice! > On Apr 5, 2019, at 10:52 AM, Jonas Devlieghere via Phabricator via > lldb-commits wrote: > > JDevlieghere added a comment. > > In D60300#1455790 , @davide wrote: > >> I think this is good regardless for readability, but I would really >>

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D60300#1455790 , @davide wrote: > I think this is good regardless for readability, but I would really > appreciate if we can collect some numbers to see how effective this change > actually is. I see 120 -> 12 seconds

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

JDevlieghere updated this revision to Diff 193909. JDevlieghere marked 5 inline comments as done. JDevlieghere added a comment. Code review feedback CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60300 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60325: [lldb] [Process/NetBSD] Fix wrongly mapping mm* registers

mgorny created this revision. mgorny added reviewers: krytarowski, labath. Fix mistake that mapped mm* registers into the space for xmm* registers, rather than the one shared with st* registers. In other words, 'register read mmN' now correctly shows the mmN register rather than part of xmmN.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

aprantl added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/data-formatter/data-formatter-objc/TestDataFormatterObjNSException.py:30 +def nsexception_data_formatter_commands(self): +self.expect( +'frame variable except0

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

aprantl added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/data-formatter/data-formatter-objc/ObjCDataFormatterTestCase.py:33 +lldbutil.run_break_set_by_file_and_line( +self, "main.m", self.line, num_expected_locations=1,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

aprantl added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/data-formatter/data-formatter-objc/ObjCDataFormatterTestCase.py:21 +# Find the line number to break at. +self.line = line_number('main.m', '// Set break point at this

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60180: [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds

sgraenitz added a comment. > No, everything is being built for android. Cross-compiling lldb-server > involves cross-compiling llvm libraries, clang libraries, and if you've got > swift in the picture, swift host libraries. LLVM and clang libraries are > built against the libc++ from the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60180: [CMake] Don't explicitly use LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR in standalone builds

sgraenitz added a comment. > [LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR is] not a cache variable when it's an in-tree build Great, then please go ahead. > From what I remember, you added back [...] Yes this was a quick-fix. I didn't have the patience in that moment to check each of them individually. > If there's a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60268: Breakpad: Parse Stack CFI records

amccarth added a comment. My concerns were address, so LGTM. I'll leave the rest to you and clayborg. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60268/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60268 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60268: Breakpad: Parse Stack CFI records

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/Breakpad/BreakpadRecords.cpp:393 + llvm::StringRef LHS, RHS; + while (std::tie(Str, Line) = getToken(Line), !Str.empty()) { +if (Str.back() == ':') { // regN clayborg wrote: > Do we

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60268: Breakpad: Parse Stack CFI records

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/Breakpad/BreakpadRecords.cpp:393 + llvm::StringRef LHS, RHS; + while (std::tie(Str, Line) = getToken(Line), !Str.empty()) { +if (Str.back() == ':') { // regN Do we really need to pull

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D59015: [lldb-mi] Include full path in the -data-disassemble response

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added inline comments. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Comment at: lldb/tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdData.cpp:419 + // Get a full path to the file. + static char pPathBuffer[PATH_MAX]; +

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D59015: [lldb-mi] Include full path in the -data-disassemble response

anton.kolesov updated this revision to Diff 193863. anton.kolesov added a comment. Added a simple test case. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59015/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59015 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357755 - modify-python-lldb.py: Insert initialization code with swig instead

Author: labath Date: Fri Apr 5 02:56:55 2019 New Revision: 357755 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357755=rev Log: modify-python-lldb.py: Insert initialization code with swig instead This is the last functional change to the generated python module being done by

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60268: Breakpad: Parse Stack CFI records

labath updated this revision to Diff 193849. labath added a comment. merge StackCFI and StackCFIInit records add some tests CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60268/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60268 Files: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/Breakpad/BreakpadRecords.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60268: Breakpad: Parse Stack CFI records

labath marked 3 inline comments as done. labath added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/Breakpad/BreakpadRecords.h:173 + llvm::DenseMap UnwindRules; +}; + amccarth wrote: > I'm not a fan of deep class hierarchies, but given that

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D59775: Minidump: Add support for reading/writing strings

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL357749: Minidump: Add support for reading/writing strings (authored by labath, committed by ). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59775?vs=193698=193842#toc Repository: rL LLVM

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60153: Re-enable most lldb-vscode tests on Linux.

labath added a comment. You might be interested to know that I've just seen TestVSCode_step flake (so far just once out of ~dozen runs) locally. I've committed r357747 to get a better error message if it happens again. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357748 - MinidumpParser: use minidump parser in llvm/Object

Author: labath Date: Fri Apr 5 00:56:39 2019 New Revision: 357748 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357748=rev Log: MinidumpParser: use minidump parser in llvm/Object This patch removes the lower layers of the minidump parsing code from the MinidumpParser class, and replaces it with

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357747 - TestVCCode_step: replace assertTrue with more specific assertions

Author: labath Date: Fri Apr 5 00:56:26 2019 New Revision: 357747 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357747=rev Log: TestVCCode_step: replace assertTrue with more specific assertions When this test fails (flakes) all we get is an error message like "False is not True". This replaces

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60271: PDBFPO: Use references instead of pointers, where possible

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL357744: PDBFPO: Use references instead of pointers, where possible (authored by labath, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Repository: rL LLVM

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60271: PDBFPO: Use references instead of pointers, where possible

labath added a comment. In D60271#1455106 , @amccarth wrote: > I noticed this also deleted two overloads of Visit from > FPOProgramASTVisitorDWARFCodegen, but that appears to be harmless (the base > class overloads were also no-ops). Yep, that was a

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r357744 - PDBFPO: Use references instead of pointers, where possible

Author: labath Date: Fri Apr 5 00:28:52 2019 New Revision: 357744 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=357744=rev Log: PDBFPO: Use references instead of pointers, where possible Summary: The code was passing pointers around, expecting they would be not null. In c++ it is possible to

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60271: PDBFPO: Use references instead of pointers, where possible

aleksandr.urakov accepted this revision. aleksandr.urakov added a comment. LGTM too! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60271/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60271 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60172: Renamed Target::GetSharedModule to AddModule, allow for ModulesDidLoad to be delayed when batch adding Modules

labath added a comment. In D60172#1455767 , @jasonmolenda wrote: > Thanks Pavel, I'll convert this to use Expected<> while I'm working on it. > I'm writing a test case right now, and looking at how DynamicPluginDarwin > works more closely for adding &

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D60300: [testsuite] Split Objective-C data formatter

labath added a comment. Looks fine to me, with some inline ideas you can implement if you think they're worthwhile. Also, since you're looking at reducing test time, the question you can ask yourself is: is it really worth it running separate dwarf+dsym flavours of these tests? I'm of the