[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

polyakov.alex created this revision. polyakov.alex added reviewers: aprantl, clayborg, labath, stella.stamenova. Herald added a subscriber: ki.stfu. Now -exec-step uses SB API instead of HandleCommand hack. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47838 Files: lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/exec-step.test tools/l

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

polyakov.alex added a comment. I'm a little bit confused about situation with thread id before my changes. For example: (gdb) thread list ~"Process 31642 stopped\n* thread #1: tid = 31642, 0x0041eed0 bash`main, name = 'bash', stop reason = breakpoint 1.1\n" ^done What we should

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

aprantl added a comment. Did the old implementation come with a testcase? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the question, but it would probably be best to preserve the old behavior. Comment at: tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp:515 + lldb::SBError error; + if (nThreadId != UINT64_MA

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

labath added a comment. I don't know if there is any spec about what the gdb-mi protocol should use for thread identification, but I think the most important part is to be consistent. If you use indexes in one place and tid's in another you'll confuse the hell out of clients trying to talk to l

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

polyakov.alex added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47838#1124730, @labath wrote: > I don't know if there is any spec about what the gdb-mi protocol should use > for thread identification, but I think the most important part is to be > consistent. If you use indexes in one place and tid

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

polyakov.alex updated this revision to Diff 150332. polyakov.alex added a comment. Changes for using thread ids in a gdb way. Also added case of specified thread into test case. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47838 Files: lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/exec-step.test tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp In

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

polyakov.alex updated this revision to Diff 150632. polyakov.alex added a comment. Removed unnecessary m_lldbResult attribute, updated python test to successfully process new error messages in exec-step command. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47838 Files: lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/exec-step.test p

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL334364: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command. (authored by apolyakov, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47838?vs=150632&

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/trunk/tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp:505-509 + if (error.Success()) +return MIstatus::success; + + SetError(error.GetCString()); + return MIstatus::failure; Utility funciton for these last four line? I menti

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

polyakov.alex added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/trunk/tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp:524 bool CMICmdCmdExecStep::Acknowledge() { - if (m_lldbResult.GetErrorSize() > 0) { -const char *pLldbErr = m_lldbResult.GetError(); -MIunused(pLldbErr); -const CMICmnMIValue