[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95922: [lldb] Honor the CPU type & subtype on macOS

jasonmolenda accepted this revision. jasonmolenda added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. This looks good to me. Are the bots all running macOS Big Sur (macOS 11)? The `-target` command line arguments in the Makefile might not work if the test is run on an older versio

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95922: [lldb] Honor the CPU type & subtype on macOS

JDevlieghere updated this revision to Diff 321005. JDevlieghere added a comment. Add test CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95922/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95922 Files: lldb/source/Host/macosx/objcxx/Host.mm lldb/test/API/macosx/posix_spawn/Makefile lldb/test/API

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95922: [lldb] Honor the CPU type & subtype on macOS

JDevlieghere added a comment. I tested this locally with a fat binary containing both an `x86_64` and `x86_64h` slice. We could do something on AS using `arm64` and `arm64e`, but I couldn't find a good way to find out (from Python) if the current architecture has Haswell/arm64e support. (lld

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95922: [lldb] Honor the CPU type & subtype on macOS

JDevlieghere created this revision. JDevlieghere added reviewers: friss, jasonmolenda. JDevlieghere requested review of this revision. Honor the CPU type (and subtype) when launching the inferior on macOS. Part of this functionality was thought to be no longer needed and removed in `85bd4369610f

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 608ee55 - [lldb/test] Stop recording fundamental return types (NFC)

Author: Med Ismail Bennani Date: 2021-02-03T02:57:26+01:00 New Revision: 608ee55a317f9f7307c90c720c3ab019926cdb49 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/608ee55a317f9f7307c90c720c3ab019926cdb49 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/608ee55a317f9f7307c90c720c3ab019926cdb49.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95899: [lldb] Convert more assertTrue to assertEqual (NFC)

kastiglione created this revision. kastiglione added reviewers: JDevlieghere, teemperor. kastiglione requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits. Follow up to D95813 , this converts multiline assertTrue

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95813: [lldb] Convert assertTrue(a == b) to assertEqual(a, b)

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG619e2e095fb1: [lldb] Convert assertTrue(a == b) to assertEqual(a, b) (authored by kastiglione). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 619e2e0 - [lldb] Convert assertTrue(a == b) to assertEqual(a, b)

Author: Dave Lee Date: 2021-02-02T12:39:03-08:00 New Revision: 619e2e095fb1cd1e60b745cf1a10af9f67a4cd41 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/619e2e095fb1cd1e60b745cf1a10af9f67a4cd41 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/619e2e095fb1cd1e60b745cf1a10af9f67a4cd41.diff LOG:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95813: [lldb] Convert assertTrue(a == b) to assertEqual(a, b)

kastiglione updated this revision to Diff 320878. kastiglione added a comment. assertNotEqual & formatting Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95813/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95813 Files: lldb/test/API/commands/register/register/r

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95813: [lldb] Convert assertTrue(a == b) to assertEqual(a, b)

teemperor accepted this revision. teemperor added a comment. Don't see any change that looks wrong from scrolling over this, so LGTM Comment at: lldb/test/API/functionalities/data-formatter/data-formatter-stl/libcxx/atomic/TestLibCxxAtomic.py:59 -self.assertTrue(i.Ge

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95813: [lldb] Convert assertTrue(a == b) to assertEqual(a, b)

teemperor added a comment. In D95813#2535209 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > Cool, I was under the impression @teemperor had already done something > similar, but I must be misremembering. I ran one big regex that got most of the Equal/Less/Bigger than, but I

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 39047f6 - [debugserver] Fix -Wmissing-field-initializers warnings on arm64

Author: Jonas Devlieghere Date: 2021-02-02T10:29:09-08:00 New Revision: 39047f6c2e5e8999b012cda1a92447bb615a6d1b URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/39047f6c2e5e8999b012cda1a92447bb615a6d1b DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/39047f6c2e5e8999b012cda1a92447bb615a6d1b.d

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] ec6815a - [debugserver] Fix -Wsign-compare warnings on arm64

Author: Jonas Devlieghere Date: 2021-02-02T10:23:57-08:00 New Revision: ec6815a72dfcf46fcca546d8c87d05606e140428 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ec6815a72dfcf46fcca546d8c87d05606e140428 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ec6815a72dfcf46fcca546d8c87d05606e140428.d

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 9a62b72 - [debugserver] Fix -Wunused-function warnings on arm64

Author: Jonas Devlieghere Date: 2021-02-02T10:20:11-08:00 New Revision: 9a62b7242aead46dd5962bc516c6527ae5e80bc0 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/9a62b7242aead46dd5962bc516c6527ae5e80bc0 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/9a62b7242aead46dd5962bc516c6527ae5e80bc0.d

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 870a58a - [debugserver] Fix -Winconsistent-missing-override warnings on arm64

Author: Jonas Devlieghere Date: 2021-02-02T09:41:18-08:00 New Revision: 870a58a75889031d0d860ec6ae51caa1ccfbd8ad URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/870a58a75889031d0d860ec6ae51caa1ccfbd8ad DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/870a58a75889031d0d860ec6ae51caa1ccfbd8ad.d

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95766: [Branch-Rename] Fix some links

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG94fac81fccfe: [Branch-Rename] Fix some links (authored by xgupta).

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95766: [Branch-Rename] Fix some links

xgupta created this revision. xgupta added reviewers: mehdi_amini, sqlbyme. Herald added a reviewer: bollu. Herald added subscribers: libcxx-commits, teijeong, rdzhabarov, tatianashp, ThomasRaoux, AlexeySotkin, msifontes, jurahul, Kayjukh, grosul1, Joonsoo, liufengdb, aartbik, lucyrfox, mgester,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95766: [Branch-Rename] Fix some links

xgupta added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/google/AvoidUnderscoreInGoogletestNameCheck.h:20 // Check for underscores in the names of googletest tests, per -// https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googletest/docs/faq.md#why-should-test-su

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D95766: [Branch-Rename] Fix some links

mehdi_amini accepted this revision. mehdi_amini added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/google/AvoidUnderscoreInGoogletestNameCheck.h:20 // Check for underscores in the names of googletest tests, per -// https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D92164: Make CommandInterpreter's execution context the same as debugger's one.

teemperor added a comment. I reverted D95761 (see Jim's comment), so you can just re-add your old test. Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D92164/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D92164 ___ ll

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 0f2be19 - Revert "[lldb] Use current execution context in SBDebugger"

Author: Raphael Isemann Date: 2021-02-02T14:41:48+01:00 New Revision: 0f2be195d5e5fc79d28692266eae226cd42678b0 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0f2be195d5e5fc79d28692266eae226cd42678b0 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0f2be195d5e5fc79d28692266eae226cd42678b0.dif

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D92164: Make CommandInterpreter's execution context the same as debugger's one.

tatyana-krasnukha added a comment. In D92164#2536036 , @werat wrote: > I think your test case is even better, the one in D95761 > doesn't try to run commands. Ok, then I'll replace it if you don't mind. CHANGES SINCE L

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D92164: Make CommandInterpreter's execution context the same as debugger's one.

werat added a comment. In D92164#2534626 , @tatyana-krasnukha wrote: > Removed test since the same case was added by D95761 > . I think your test case is even better, the one in D95761