ravitheja added a comment. Although a bit confusing, there is more flexibility for the user.I must also point out that the trace buffer available is not unlimited and there can be situations where a user might simultaneously want to trace newly spawned threads with a smaller buffer and trace an individual thread with perhaps a bigger buffer size. Tracing all threads is definitely important coz the user might not want to separately start tracing on each new thread. Now the current design might be a bit confusing but I am willing to document it well with examples and uses cases.
================ Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/Linux/NativeProcessLinux.h:277 + + llvm::DenseMap<lldb::tid_t, ProcessorTraceMonitorSP> + m_processor_trace_monitor; ---------------- labath wrote: > I'd like to downgrade these to unique pointers to ProcessTraceMonitor. > There's no reason for these to ever outlive or escape the process instance, > so it's natural to say they are strongly owned by it. In other places where > you use ProcessorTraceMonitorSP you can just use regular pointers or > references (depending on whether they can be null or not). Hi, I don't see the advantage of changing to unique pointers ? coz when the process dies they will be destroyed anyhow, plus using shared pointers makes it easier for functions operating with the ProcessTraceMonitor to work. https://reviews.llvm.org/D33674 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
