mgorny marked an inline comment as done. mgorny added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/NetBSD/NativeProcessNetBSD.cpp:334 thread->SetStoppedByTrace(); SetState(StateType::eStateStopped, true); ---------------- krytarowski wrote: > I presume that in this code path we land into a scenario that: > > 1. Trap on a different LWP > 2. User sets new watchpoints > 3. We land here with a SIGTRAP on old watchpoint that was wiped out. > > If so, we shall ignore this report, bail out and resume execution with > `PT_CONTINUE`. > > I think that this path could be some remnant from Linux shared trap reasons. I was wondering whether it's better to silently ignore unknown watchpoints or stop the process. Decided the latter is better for the user, in case it carried some useful information still. Not to mention it has lower risk of crashing lldb-server if I get some logic wrong. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D70025/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D70025 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list email@example.com https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits