I should have checked lldb-commits first. That sounds like a much better option. :)
- Lang. On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Tong Shen <endlessr...@google.com> wrote: > Oops, sorry Lang, didn't see your patch. > > The old JIT has been completely removed by upstream LLVM :-( > So I think it's better to avoid maintaining that ourselves... > > Also, the functions specific to the old JITMemoryManager seems not > used by lldb (except the wrapper functions). > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Eric Christopher <echri...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > See also Tong's patch to just move to SectionMemoryManager on > lldb-commits :) > > > > -eric > > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Lang Hames <lha...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> The JITMemoryManager class was removed from MCJIT in r218316, but LLDB > is > >> still relying on it. > >> > >> The attached patch moves the JITMemoryManager in to LLDB (minus the > AtExit > >> handler functionality, which I don't believe LLDB was using, and which > was > >> causing build warnings for me locally). > >> > >> I'm still running the test suite locally, so I'm sure whether this > passes > >> all the tests, but it does at least seem to get LLDB building again. > >> > >> I'll update with test results as soon as they come through. > >> > >> - Lang. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> lldb-dev mailing list > >> lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > >> > > > > -- > Best Regards, Tong Shen >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
