lemo added a comment. Thanks Greg, looks good to me (a couple of inline comments left at your discretion)
================ Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/minidump/ProcessMinidump.cpp:15 // Other libraries and framework includes +//#include "lldb/Core/Architecture.h" #include "lldb/Core/Module.h" ---------------- it this set for removal? ================ Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/minidump/RegisterContextMinidump_ARM.cpp:195 +// ARM general purpose registers. +const uint32_t g_gpr_regnums[] = { + reg_r0, reg_r1, reg_r2, reg_r3, reg_r4, reg_r5, reg_r6, reg_r7, ---------------- clayborg wrote: > lemo wrote: > > use std::array for these kind of static arrays? (debug bounds checks, easy > > access to the static size, ...) > Tried it but it introduces a global constructor. We try to avoid those. We shouldn't have a dynamic initializer: that's strange, if that's the case we have a compiler bug on our hands. A quick experiment indicates that even with -O0 recent clang/llvm do the right thing: https://godbolt.org/g/NMUFLP Is the problem only with arrays of RegisterInfo structs? If that's the case the cause is RegisterInfo itself and std::array should not make a difference (ie. we'd see the dynamic initializer even with plain C arrays) https://reviews.llvm.org/D49750 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits