================ @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ +//===-- MemoryRegionInfoCache.h ---------------------------------*- C++ -*-===// +// +// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions. +// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information. +// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception +// +//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// + +#ifndef LLDB_TARGET_MEMORYREGIONINFOCACHE_H +#define LLDB_TARGET_MEMORYREGIONINFOCACHE_H + +#include "lldb/Target/MemoryRegionInfo.h" +#include "lldb/Utility/RangeMap.h" + +namespace lldb_private { +class MemoryRegionInfoCache { +public: + MemoryRegionInfoCache(Process &process) + : m_region_infos(), m_process(process) {} + + /// Remove all cached entries. + void Clear(); + + /// Remove cached information about region containing \a addr, if any. + void Flush(lldb::addr_t addr, lldb::addr_t size); + + /// Locate the memory region that contains load_addr. + Status GetMemoryRegionInfo(lldb::addr_t load_addr, ---------------- jasonmolenda wrote:
Re the return type, the problem is that we've exposing this through SB API in SBProcess::GetMemoryRegionInfo which returns an SBError. We could still use Expected once we're in the lldb_private API namespace, but we would need to convert the Expected result to an SBError. I think I can argue that staying entirely on Status/SBError for the entire API call chain makes more sense. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/202509 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
