[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 6d94eea - [lldb] Ad os_signpost support to lldb_private::Timer

Author: Jonas Devlieghere Date: 2021-01-06T15:16:09-08:00 New Revision: 6d94eeadd28af4d488b5875778a3ebfa0d749b52 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6d94eeadd28af4d488b5875778a3ebfa0d749b52 DIFF:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93657: [lldb] Ad os_signpost support to `lldb_private::Timer`

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. JDevlieghere marked an inline comment as done. Closed by commit rG6d94eeadd28a: [lldb] Ad os_signpost support to lldb_private::Timer (authored by JDevlieghere). Herald added a project: LLDB. Repository: rG LLVM Github

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D78978: [LLDB] Add support for WebAssembly debugging

dblaikie added a comment. In D78978#2483327 , @paolosev wrote: > In D78978#2481358 , @vwzm228 wrote: > >> Is there any progress about such patch and D78801 >> ？ >> >> I have

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM. Nice and simple. We can do another patch for vAttachOrWait as it will be very simple modifications and very similar to this patch. I am find avoiding all of the polling interval and

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D78978: [LLDB] Add support for WebAssembly debugging

paolosev added a comment. In D78978#2481358 , @vwzm228 wrote: > Is there any progress about such patch and D78801 > ？ > > I have implemented the debugging feature in our Wasm VM based on >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D78978: [LLDB] Add support for WebAssembly debugging

paolosev added a comment. In D78978#2483354 , @dblaikie wrote: > Usually the thing is to ping the review thread at most weekly & maybe search > around for specific reviewers to ask if you're met with a lot of silence. There was not a lot of feedback on

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93951: [vscode] Improve runInTerminal and support linux

clayborg added a comment. And a test for current working directory Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D93951/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D93951 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94063: lldb: Add support for DW_AT_ranges on DW_TAG_subprograms

dblaikie updated this revision to Diff 315035. dblaikie added a comment. Update test to avoid running the program Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94063/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D94063 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94063: lldb: Add support for DW_AT_ranges on DW_TAG_subprograms

dblaikie added a comment. In D94063#2481867 , @labath wrote: > The fix is good, but the test could be improved. Yeah - haven't written lldb patches before so totally open to suggestions on the testing front for sure. Thanks! > Combining assembly input

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] fbc13e9 - [lldb] Skip scoped enum checks with Dwarf <4

Author: Jonas Devlieghere Date: 2021-01-06T17:13:33-08:00 New Revision: fbc13e9345c7c9607f0c28e0ccfa9a7baf254f29 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/fbc13e9345c7c9607f0c28e0ccfa9a7baf254f29 DIFF:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93951: [vscode] Improve runInTerminal and support linux

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. So I like that we are using files in the file system for things, but we are using 3 of them and that seems excessive. See inlined comments and see if we can get down to using

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93951: [vscode] Improve runInTerminal and support linux

clayborg added a comment. We should also add a test that makes sure that env vars set in the launch config are received in the program that runs in the terminal Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D93951/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94064: lldb: Add support for printing variables with DW_AT_ranges on DW_TAG_subprograms

dblaikie added a comment. In D94064#2481925 , @labath wrote: > I don't think that simply setting func_lo_pc to zero will be sufficient to > make this work. I would expect this to break in more complicated scenarios > (like, even if we just have two of

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94064: lldb: Add support for printing variables with DW_AT_ranges on DW_TAG_subprograms

dblaikie updated this revision to Diff 315036. dblaikie added a comment. Use image lookup to make test runnable without executing the test code Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94064/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D94064 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93951: [vscode] Improve runInTerminal and support linux

wallace updated this revision to Diff 315015. wallace marked 10 inline comments as done. wallace added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: mgorny. Address all comments. - Moved all the communication logic between the debug adaptor and the launcher to classes, simplifying the code in

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] d853bd7 - [lldb/Lua] add support for multiline scripted breakpoints

Author: Pedro Tammela Date: 2021-01-07T00:31:36Z New Revision: d853bd7a4e86a50f7d7e6a5f397fcbd1e7d844b4 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d853bd7a4e86a50f7d7e6a5f397fcbd1e7d844b4 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d853bd7a4e86a50f7d7e6a5f397fcbd1e7d844b4.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93481: [lldb/Lua] add support for multiline scripted breakpoints

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGd853bd7a4e86: [lldb/Lua] add support for multiline scripted breakpoints (authored by tammela). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D78801: [LLDB] Add class WasmProcess for WebAssembly debugging

paolosev added a subscriber: vwzm228. paolosev added a comment. In D78978#2481358 , @vwzm228 wrote: > Is there any progress about such patch and D78801 > ？ > > I have implemented the debugging feature in our Wasm VM based

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] b9bfe8a - [lldb] [debugserver] Add stN aliases for stmmN for compatibility

Author: Michał Górny Date: 2021-01-07T02:10:38+01:00 New Revision: b9bfe8a75306b211dc53291d28a31c0f37be2a2c URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b9bfe8a75306b211dc53291d28a31c0f37be2a2c DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b9bfe8a75306b211dc53291d28a31c0f37be2a2c.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91847: [lldb] [debugserver] Add stN aliases for stmmN for compatibility

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGb9bfe8a75306: [lldb] [debugserver] Add stN aliases for stmmN for compatibility (authored by mgorny). Herald added a project: LLDB. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94063: lldb: Add support for DW_AT_ranges on DW_TAG_subprograms

labath added a comment. The fix is good, but the test could be improved. Combining assembly input with running the inferior effectively limits the test to a single platform (assembly is not portable, and running requires asm to match the host). AFAICT, we don't actually need to run the binary

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94077: Support unscoped enumeration members in the expression evaluator.

labath added a comment. This suffers from the same problem as the other patch, where the other index classes (apple_names and debug_names) will essentially never be able to implement this feature. (Unless they re-index the dwarf themselves, that is, but this would defeat the purpose of having

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

labath added a comment. I don't think it's a good idea to stuff all of this into a single patch. Can we go back to the version which just implements the basic vAttachWait packet (we can bikeshed on what the default interval should be)? I believe new commands/options/packets should be done in

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

labath added a comment. In D93895#2481990 , @augusto2112 wrote: >> I don't think it's a good idea to stuff all of this into a single patch. Can >> we go back to the version which just implements the basic vAttachWait packet >> (we can bikeshed on what

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

augusto2112 added a comment. > I don't think it's a good idea to stuff all of this into a single patch. Can > we go back to the version which just implements the basic vAttachWait packet > (we can bikeshed on what the default interval should be)? I believe new > commands/options/packets should

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

augusto2112 updated this revision to Diff 314874. augusto2112 added a comment. Back to implementation of vAttachWait Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D93895/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D93895 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93481: [lldb/Lua] add support for multiline scripted breakpoints

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. This looks better. I haven't checked the rest of the patch in detail, but it seems ok at a quick glance and Jonas appeared to be happy with it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93926: [lldb] Don't remove the lldb.debugger var after exiting the interpreter

labath added a comment. In D93926#2479749 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > Your argument is correct because the interactive script interpreter always > belongs to a single debugger. I'm not sure that even this is true (for python, anyway). IIUC all SBDebuggers

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94008: [LLDB] DynamicRegisterInfo calculate offsets in separate function

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LG, modulo inline comment. Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/Utility/DynamicRegisterInfo.h:45-46 + void ConfigureOffsets(); + size_t GetNumRegisters() const;

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

augusto2112 added a comment. Ok, that makes sense! Let me summarize the work that needs to be done, correct me if I get something wrong: - Change back `vAttachWait` and `vAttachOrWait` to the original format of sending only the process name. - Add default values for "waitfor-interval-usec"

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D94064: lldb: Add support for printing variables with DW_AT_ranges on DW_TAG_subprograms

labath added a comment. I don't think that simply setting func_lo_pc to zero will be sufficient to make this work. I would expect this to break in more complicated scenarios (like, even if we just have two of these functions). I think the only reason it works in this case is because for this

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91847: [lldb] [debugserver] Add stN aliases for stmmN for compatibility

labath added a comment. In D91847#2410723 , @krytarowski wrote: > I would mark stmmX as an alias to stX and keep stX as the default for all > platforms. stmmX could be an alias for everybody for legacy reasons. Possibly. Though we could also do that

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91847: [lldb] [debugserver] Add stN aliases for stmmN for compatibility

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I think this is fine -- sorry this dropped off my radar. @jasonmolenda, do you have any thoughts about this? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D91847/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

augusto2112 updated this revision to Diff 314896. augusto2112 marked 5 inline comments as done. augusto2112 added a comment. Changes test to launch a process before and after we ask for the attach. Minor code fixes as well. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91734: [FastISel] Flush local value map on every instruction

probinson added a comment. This version of the patch avoids the weirdness I was seeing with prolog instructions in certain cases. The gdb test suite is largely happy with this; it avoids the new failures I mentioned previously, and one test needed to have some "next" commands updated. Here's

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91734: [FastISel] Flush local value map on every instruction

dblaikie accepted this revision. dblaikie added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. In D91734#2480474 , @probinson wrote: > This version of the patch avoids the weirdness I was seeing with prolog > instructions in certain cases. >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91734: [FastISel] Flush local value map on every instruction

probinson updated this revision to Diff 314708. probinson added a comment. Change how PHIs are handled; if the operand has a debug location, use it, otherwise don't set a debug location. Then, flushLocalValueMap() will look at the first local-value instruction; if it doesn't already have a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91734: [FastISel] Flush local value map on every instruction

probinson added a comment. In D91734#2480930 , @dblaikie wrote: > I haven't looked closely, but I take it this one test modification seems > reasonable to you? I guess we're stepping into some subexpressions on a > function call that we previously

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91734: [FastISel] Flush local value map on every instruction

dblaikie added a comment. In D91734#2482280 , @probinson wrote: > In D91734#2480930 , @dblaikie wrote: > >> I haven't looked closely, but I take it this one test modification seems >> reasonable to you? I guess

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D91734: [FastISel] Flush local value map on every instruction

probinson added a comment. In D91734#2482318 , @dblaikie wrote: > But, yes, we could possibly do better with more strategic is_stmt, but that's > a big/complex piece of work to tackle. Oh, absolutely. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. And the behavior

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 4e0e79d - [lldb] Simplify some lldb-server tests

Author: Pavel Labath Date: 2021-01-06T15:39:51+01:00 New Revision: 4e0e79dd349a208384449fd8dcdc9bf1644ee0f3 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4e0e79dd349a208384449fd8dcdc9bf1644ee0f3 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4e0e79dd349a208384449fd8dcdc9bf1644ee0f3.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D93895: Implement vAttachWait in lldb-server

labath added a comment. Thanks. This talk of all these packets has made me realize I did not completely understand the purpose of this packet. To really test the exclusion functionality of this packet, I guess we should be launching two instances of the inferior (one before sending the packet,