[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

2018-06-06 Thread Adrian Prantl via Phabricator via lldb-commits
aprantl added a comment. Did the old implementation come with a testcase? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the question, but it would probably be best to preserve the old behavior. Comment at: tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp:515 + lldb::SBError error; + if (nThreadId != UINT64_MA

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47797: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-next command.

2018-06-06 Thread Adrian Prantl via Phabricator via lldb-commits
aprantl accepted this revision. aprantl added inline comments. Comment at: lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/exec-next.test:19 + +-exec-next --thread 0 +# Check that exec-next can process the case of invalid thread ID. 0 feels like it might actually be a valid thread id on

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added a subscriber: aleksandr.urakov. zturner added a comment. Do you just need a pdb, or does it really need to be a vs pdb? lld can generate high quality pdbs now. So it might be possible to use lld to link and produce a pdb when you run the test. Pavel’s suggestion is equally viable, y

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
Do you just need a pdb, or does it really need to be a vs pdb? lld can generate high quality pdbs now. So it might be possible to use lld to link and produce a pdb when you run the test. Pavel’s suggestion is equally viable, you can dump a pdb to yaml and convert it back to a pdb at test time. Th

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Aaron Smith via Phabricator via lldb-commits
asmith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47708#1123334, @labath wrote: > I have reverted this because of the broken tests. > > However, I have to also ask: isn't there better way to test this? (one that > does not depend on opaque checked-in binaries). On linux, I could check-in a >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47801: Make lldb tools dependent on liblldb target when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Alex Langford via Phabricator via lldb-commits
xiaobai abandoned this revision. xiaobai added a comment. Going to go with the direction we discussed here. This shouldn't be needed. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47801 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47801: Make lldb tools dependent on liblldb target when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Alex Langford via Phabricator via lldb-commits
xiaobai added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47801#1123933, @labath wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47801#1123895, @xiaobai wrote: > > > > - rename INCLUDE_IN_FRAMEWORK to something more neutral (USED_BY_LIBLLDB > > > or whatever) > > > - make the liblldb -> tool dependency not co

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47792: Fix up Info.plist when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Alex Langford via Phabricator via lldb-commits
xiaobai added inline comments. Comment at: source/API/CMakeLists.txt:184 + set(EXECUTABLE_NAME "LLDB") + set(CURRENT_PROJECT_VERSION "360.99.0") set_target_properties(liblldb PROPERTIES clayborg wrote: > sas wrote: > > clayborg wrote: > > > Currently the app

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47801: Make lldb tools dependent on liblldb target when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47801#1123895, @xiaobai wrote: > > - rename INCLUDE_IN_FRAMEWORK to something more neutral (USED_BY_LIBLLDB or > > whatever) > > - make the liblldb -> tool dependency not conditioned by > > LLDB_BUILD_FRAMEWORK > > - remove the lldb->tool dep

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47801: Make lldb tools dependent on liblldb target when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Stephane Sezer via Phabricator via lldb-commits
sas added a comment. > One idea I had was to introduce another target for the framwork itself, e.g. > lldbFramework, which gets built if LLDB_BUILD_FRAMEWORK is set. It would > depend on liblldb and all the necessary tools, headers, etc, that the > framework would need. That way liblldb can dep

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

2018-06-06 Thread Alexander Polyakov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
polyakov.alex added a comment. I'm a little bit confused about situation with thread id before my changes. For example: (gdb) thread list ~"Process 31642 stopped\n* thread #1: tid = 31642, 0x0041eed0 bash`main, name = 'bash', stop reason = breakpoint 1.1\n" ^done What we should

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47801: Make lldb tools dependent on liblldb target when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Alex Langford via Phabricator via lldb-commits
xiaobai added a comment. > No existing INCLUDE_IN_FRAMEWORK tool links to liblldb, just it's individual > components, which is fine. And this is probably a state that we should > maintain for the future. I think I agree with you here. > So, how about we do this instead: > > - rename INCLUDE_I

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47838: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-step command.

2018-06-06 Thread Alexander Polyakov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
polyakov.alex created this revision. polyakov.alex added reviewers: aprantl, clayborg, labath, stella.stamenova. Herald added a subscriber: ki.stfu. Now -exec-step uses SB API instead of HandleCommand hack. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47838 Files: lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/exec-step.test tools/l

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47832: DebugNamesDWARFIndex: Add support for partial indexes

2018-06-06 Thread Greg Clayton via Phabricator via lldb-commits
clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Just one nit you can choose to fix or not. Comment at: source/Plugins/SymbolFile/DWARF/ManualDWARFIndex.cpp:39-41 +if (!unit) + continue; +if (m_units_to_avo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47781: DebugNamesDWARFIndex: Add ability to lookup variables

2018-06-06 Thread Greg Clayton via Phabricator via lldb-commits
clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Much better. Anything we can do to clearly define and simplify the indexers is great stuff. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47781 ___ lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47832: DebugNamesDWARFIndex: Add support for partial indexes

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath created this revision. labath added reviewers: JDevlieghere, clayborg. Herald added a subscriber: aprantl. It possible that a single module has indexed and non-indexed compile units. In this case, we can use the fast indexed lookup for the first ones and fall back to the manual index for th

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47781: DebugNamesDWARFIndex: Add ability to lookup variables

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath updated this revision to Diff 150149. labath added a comment. Ok, so it turns out we **were** passing qualified names into the GetGlobalVariables function. In the apple-tables case we were then searching based on the basename and completely ignoring the context. This resulted in incorrect m

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47797: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-next command.

2018-06-06 Thread Alexander Polyakov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
polyakov.alex added inline comments. Comment at: tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp:384 + if (nThreadId != UINT64_MAX) { +lldb::SBThread sbThread = rSessionInfo.GetProcess().GetThreadByID(nThreadId); +if (sbThread.IsValid()) We can't test this branch until

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47797: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-next command.

2018-06-06 Thread Alexander Polyakov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
polyakov.alex updated this revision to Diff 150137. polyakov.alex added a reviewer: labath. polyakov.alex added a comment. Added some checks for invalid thread id. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47797 Files: lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/exec-next.test lit/tools/lldb-mi/exec/inputs/main.c tools/lldb-

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Zachary Turner via Phabricator via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. The problem is that Phabricator doesn't preserve binary in diffs https://reviews.llvm.org/D47708 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Aleksandr Urakov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
aleksandr.urakov added a comment. > I think you have to specify --binary when generating the diff. I have specified --binary when I was generating the patch, and there is encoded binaries in the patch file, may be they was somehow cutted out during an upload to the Phabricator... I have attache

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Aaron Smith via Phabricator via lldb-commits
asmith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47708#1123286, @aleksandr.urakov wrote: > Thank you! > > But it looks like the binary files (*.pdb and *.exe) have not been committed > properly (they have zero size). I've seen that issue before. I think you have to specify --binary when g

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47629: [DWARF] Add (empty) DebugNamesDWARFIndex class and a setting to control its use

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL334088: [DWARF] Add (empty) DebugNamesDWARFIndex class and a setting to control its use (authored by labath, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r334088 - [DWARF] Add (empty) DebugNamesDWARFIndex class and a setting to control its use

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Wed Jun 6 04:35:23 2018 New Revision: 334088 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=334088&view=rev Log: [DWARF] Add (empty) DebugNamesDWARFIndex class and a setting to control its use Summary: This patch adds the skeleton for implementing the DWARF v5 name index class

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47812: [lldb] [lit] Do not run Python tests w/ LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON

2018-06-06 Thread Michał Górny via Phabricator via lldb-commits
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL334080: [lit] Do not run Python tests w/ LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON (authored by mgorny, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47812?vs=150

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r334080 - [lit] Do not run Python tests w/ LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON

2018-06-06 Thread Michal Gorny via lldb-commits
Author: mgorny Date: Wed Jun 6 02:44:14 2018 New Revision: 334080 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=334080&view=rev Log: [lit] Do not run Python tests w/ LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON Skip all Python-based tests as unsupported when LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON is enabled. Otherwise, those tests simply

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. I have reverted this because of the broken tests. However, I have to also ask: isn't there better way to test this? (one that does not depend on opaque checked-in binaries). On linux, I could check-in a .s file which has the line table exactly as I want it and then have

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r334076 - Revert "PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions"

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Wed Jun 6 02:16:00 2018 New Revision: 334076 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=334076&view=rev Log: Revert "PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions" This reverts commit r334030 because it adds a broken test. Removed: lldb/trunk/unittests

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47812: [lldb] [lit] Do not run Python tests w/ LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Makes sense to me. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47812 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailma

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47812: [lldb] [lit] Do not run Python tests w/ LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON

2018-06-06 Thread Michał Górny via Phabricator via lldb-commits
mgorny created this revision. mgorny added reviewers: JDevlieghere, labath. Skip all Python-based tests as unsupported when LLDB_DISABLE_PYTHON is enabled. Otherwise, those tests simply fail being unable to import lldb module. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47812 Files: lit/CMakeLists.txt lit/S

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47708: PDB support of function-level linking and splitted functions

2018-06-06 Thread Aleksandr Urakov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
aleksandr.urakov added a comment. Thank you! But it looks like the binary files (*.pdb and *.exe) have not been committed properly (they have zero size). https://reviews.llvm.org/D47708 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org htt

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47797: [lldb-mi] Re-implement MI -exec-next command.

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added inline comments. Comment at: tools/lldb-mi/MICmdCmdExec.cpp:384 if (nThreadId != UINT64_MAX) -strCmd += CMIUtilString::Format(" %llu", nThreadId); - rDebugger.GetCommandInterpreter().HandleCommand(strCmd.c_str(), m_lldbResult, -

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D47801: Make lldb tools dependent on liblldb target when building LLDB.framework with CMake

2018-06-06 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47801#1123051, @sas wrote: > Don't we risk creating circular dependencies with this? What happens when a > tool depends on liblldb? you'll have theTool depend on liblldb and liblldb > depend on theTool. The same thought has occurred to me,