labath added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
================
Comment at: test/functionalities/register/TestRegisters.py:195
@@ +194,3 @@
+ for x in range(0,16):
+ self.runCmd ("si", RUN_SUCCEEDED)
+
----------------
First I would like to applaud for writing a test case for such a delicate
issue. I know it's not easy given the current test infrastructure.
However, this change seems very fragile and likely to break due to random
changes in clang implementation and/or command line flags. Even the gcc path
can break if the gcc happens to produce slightly different output. I would like
to avoid relying on hardcoded instruction counts.
How about we try something like this:
- in the inline assembly, we prepend the code you want to test with "int3"
- run the inferior normally. it should hit the debugger trap and stop (you can
verify that the stop reason is indeed sigtrap)
- the next instruction should point precisely at the code you want to test,
without relying on any debug info or instruction counts
- proceed with the test normally
what do you think?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12677
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
