================
@@ -842,28 +842,6 @@ bool DNBArchMachARM64::NotifyException(MachException::Data
&exc) {
return true;
}
- // detect a __builtin_debugtrap instruction pattern ("brk #0xf000")
- // and advance the $pc past it, so that the user can continue execution.
- // Generally speaking, this knowledge should be centralized in lldb,
- // recognizing the builtin_trap instruction and knowing how to advance
- // the pc past it, so that continue etc work.
- if (exc.exc_data.size() == 2 && exc.exc_data[0] == EXC_ARM_BREAKPOINT) {
- nub_addr_t pc = GetPC(INVALID_NUB_ADDRESS);
- if (pc != INVALID_NUB_ADDRESS && pc > 0) {
- DNBBreakpoint *bp =
- m_thread->Process()->Breakpoints().FindByAddress(pc);
- if (bp == nullptr) {
- uint8_t insnbuf[4];
- if (m_thread->Process()->ReadMemory(pc, 4, insnbuf) == 4) {
- uint8_t builtin_debugtrap_insn[4] = {0x00, 0x00, 0x3e,
- 0xd4}; // brk #0xf000
- if (memcmp(insnbuf, builtin_debugtrap_insn, 4) == 0) {
- SetPC(pc + 4);
- }
- }
- }
- }
- }
----------------
DavidSpickett wrote:
I know in theory your change makes this redundant, but is there anything that
prevents you from leaving it in for now?
We do need to know that new lldb interacts properly with older debugservers
that will include this code. So if you land this PR without removing the
debugserver code, we can check that is the case.
If the buildbots are quiet then you can make a simple follow up to remove this
code.
I also want @jasonmolenda to at least be aware when this removed, and I think
there's no requirement to do it right now.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/174348
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
