================
@@ -841,12 +841,14 @@ static bool CheckIfWatchpointsSupported(Target *target,
Status &error) {
if (!num_supported_hardware_watchpoints)
return true;
- if (num_supported_hardware_watchpoints == 0) {
- error.SetErrorStringWithFormat(
- "Target supports (%u) hardware watchpoint slots.\n",
- *num_supported_hardware_watchpoints);
- return false;
- }
+ // If num_supported_hardware_watchpoints is zero, set an
+ //error message and return false.
----------------
DavidSpickett wrote:
I think this function can go one of three ways:
* We can't detect h/w watch, so we assume they are supported.
* We can detect them and there are > 0, return true.
* We can detect them but there are 0 of them, set error message and return
false.
The code as you've got it here will set the error message if either of the
final 2 are true.
What you could do to keep the intended behaviour is simply change the if to:
```
if (*num_supported_hardware_watchpoints == 0)
```
Then there is no redundant conditon, the first if checks whether the optional
is valid, the second one checks the value contained in it.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91882
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
