Or is this just a problem with a bad test? Are we telling LLDB to launch the test and LLDB is doing the launch + attach in the windows platform and that is what is hosing up the attach? Or is this a flawed test where the test just manually launches the process with no hopes of syncing with the process we are attaching to?
> On Aug 31, 2015, at 3:16 PM, Greg Clayton via lldb-dev > <lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > So a few things: > > 1 - on MacOSX we can reliably launch a process via posix_spawn() with a flag > set that sets the process to stop at __dyld_start which is the first > instruction in the program. So our launch then attach always works reliably > because when we launch the process set set this posix_spawn() flag. > > 2 - on linux I believe this is solved by doing a manual fork(), sync(), > exec(). > > 3 - on windows we have a sync problem for the launch first then attach due to > this extra thread. Is this the case? > > Seems like you should be able to launch with Use the CreateProcess() > function, set CREATE_SUSPENDED and then attach no? > > I would rather not solve this problem that is windows only by requiring that > all test suite functions link to a .a file. We should be able to launch a > process and debug it using the launch then attach method that is used by our > platform. > > Greg > > > >> On Aug 27, 2015, at 4:04 PM, via lldb-dev <lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:17:24PM +0000, Zachary Turner wrote: >>> In what instances do you think it wouldn't work? At least on Windows it's >>> trivial. Jim provided some code that would work on OSX, and someone else >>> provided a method earlier in the thread that should work for Linux. What >>> are the specific reliability concerns you have? >> >> I'm basing this off our own experiences - we use a similar method to >> test Android and iOS platforms, and they work most of the time, but fail >> randomly, about once every 25 runs, because one of the 50 or so test >> cases couldn't sync up with the debug server on the device. Do other >> people see similar problems? >> >> If you're running the tests natively, I bet you'll be fine. >> _______________________________________________ >> lldb-dev mailing list >> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_lldb-2Ddev&d=BQIGaQ&c=eEvniauFctOgLOKGJOplqw&r=e494ZqshU04UaasD49FjA8X8-41XrPe2DEAUCC4uIBA&m=rcCO6AJ3AdDHg5mYGyuAIclByBVrIHeeEMSbtprurNY&s=7I8Xb9uQ5clKv1lA-TQgZ6iHALia6UDWoINpajCOoQ8&e= >> > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
