[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280906 - I'm experimenting with changing how the mixed source & assembly

Author: jmolenda Date: Thu Sep 8 00:12:41 2016 New Revision: 280906 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280906=rev Log: I'm experimenting with changing how the mixed source & assembly mode in lldb works. I've been discussing this with Jim Ingham, Greg Clayton, and Kate Stone for the

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280903 - I had a problem with one SDK where dispatch_release was actually a

Author: jmolenda Date: Wed Sep 7 21:29:40 2016 New Revision: 280903 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280903=rev Log: I had a problem with one SDK where dispatch_release was actually a macro, so writing ::dispatch_release did not work as expected. Remove the global anon namespace ::

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280902 - Force the initialization of the m_type ivar in

Author: jmolenda Date: Wed Sep 7 21:26:58 2016 New Revision: 280902 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280902=rev Log: Force the initialization of the m_type ivar in Function::GetStartLineSourceInfo before we try to return the start line information about a function; this function

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280892 - Remove lldb coding conventions as they are no longer relevant.

Author: jingham Date: Wed Sep 7 19:42:02 2016 New Revision: 280892 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280892=rev Log: Remove lldb coding conventions as they are no longer relevant. Removed: lldb/trunk/www/lldb-coding-conventions.html Modified: lldb/trunk/www/sidebar.incl

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280879 - Remove CxaDemangle.cpp / .h from xcode project file.

Author: jmolenda Date: Wed Sep 7 18:08:36 2016 New Revision: 280879 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280879=rev Log: Remove CxaDemangle.cpp / .h from xcode project file. Modified: lldb/trunk/lldb.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj Modified: lldb/trunk/lldb.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj URL:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24304: Braindump of what an LLDB lit test might look like

zturner created this revision. zturner added subscribers: LLDB, lldb-commits, rnk. I was trying to brainstorm what a real test that currently exists might look like if converted to a lit-style test. Not even proposing we do this, just figured I would throw up what I came up with in case anyone

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24251: LLDB: API for Permission of object file's sections

Eugene.Zelenko added inline comments. Comment at: source/API/SBSection.cpp:257 @@ +256,3 @@ +SectionSP section_sp(GetSP()); +if (section_sp.get()) +return section_sp->GetPermissions(); You don't need to use get(), because smart pointers have

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24255: Fix for rL280668, Intel(R) Memory Protection Extensions (Intel(R) MPX) support.

labath added a comment. I think we're approaching the end now. If you could upload the new version (you'll have to reformat the changes), I'll give it a final pass. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/register/intel_xtended_registers/Makefile:6 @@ +5,3

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

rafael closed this revision. rafael added a comment. 280821 https://reviews.llvm.org/D24293 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

clayborg added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24293#535928, @zturner wrote: > AFAICT, this patch only changes the case where we were already not able to > use the fast demangler. So nothing should change. Yep, I saw that and that is why I OK'ed the patch. Someone else suggested

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

chaoren added a comment. Cool. Would it be a good idea to only use LLVM's demangler? We can get rid of all the messy ifdef business, and I assume the LLVM demangler would be better maintained and more up to date than any system demangler. https://reviews.llvm.org/D24293

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

zturner added a subscriber: zturner. zturner added a comment. AFAICT, this patch only changes the case where we were already not able to use the fast demangler. So nothing should change. https://reviews.llvm.org/D24293 ___ lldb-commits mailing

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24236: gdb-remote: Add jModulesInfo packet

labath added a comment. Ok, after a bit more digging, this is what I have found: > Error ProcessGDBRemote::GetLoadedModuleList (LoadedModuleInfoList & list); > This packet is not usable **in it's current form** as it does not include the UUID of the module. As far as I can tell, it is

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. We need to carefully benchmark any changes in demangling if we are thinking about switching to using llvm::itaniumDemangle() for everything. The demangler that was built into libcxxabi

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24236: gdb-remote: Add jModulesInfo packet

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Sounds good. As long as we know what is there (the XML and Jason's other packet) and know that the desired functionalities do not overlap I am fine with the approach that you suggest!

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

On 7 September 2016 at 11:35, Chaoren Lin wrote: > chaoren added a comment. > > Cool. Would it be a good idea to only use LLVM's demangler? We can get rid of > all the messy ifdef business, and I assume the LLVM demangler would be better > maintained and more up to date

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

On 7 September 2016 at 10:41, Ed Maste wrote: > emaste added a subscriber: emaste. > emaste added a comment. > > Which library contains `llvm::itaniumDemangle`? lib/Demangle. I will try to make sue a shared library build works and update the thread. Cheers, Rafael

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24293: Use llvm's demangler

emaste added a subscriber: emaste. emaste added a comment. Which library contains `llvm::itaniumDemangle`? https://reviews.llvm.org/D24293 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24255: Fix for rL280668, Intel(R) Memory Protection Extensions (Intel(R) MPX) support.

valentinagiusti marked an inline comment as done. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/register/intel_xtended_registers/Makefile:6 @@ +5,3 @@ +ifeq "$(ARCH)" "i386" + CFLAGS_EXTRAS += -mmpx -fcheck-pointer-bounds -fuse-ld=bfd -m32 + LD_EXTRAS +=

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24255: Fix for rL280668, Intel(R) Memory Protection Extensions (Intel(R) MPX) support.

labath added inline comments. Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/register/intel_xtended_registers/Makefile:5 @@ +4,3 @@ + +ifeq "$(ARCH)" "i386" + CXXFLAGS += -mmpx -fcheck-pointer-bounds -fuse-ld=bfd -m32 valentinagiusti wrote: >

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280793 - Fix unittest compilation on windows

Author: labath Date: Wed Sep 7 03:46:50 2016 New Revision: 280793 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280793=rev Log: Fix unittest compilation on windows After the reformat, the unittests do not compile due to missing due to redefinition errors between PosixApi.h and ucrt/direct.h.

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24255: Fix for rL280668, Intel(R) Memory Protection Extensions (Intel(R) MPX) support.

valentinagiusti updated this revision to Diff 70507. valentinagiusti added a comment. Improved TestMPXRegisters.py and Makefile according to review. https://reviews.llvm.org/D24255 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/register/Makefile