[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293366 - One of the changes Jim made in r286288 (cleaning up the stop print

2017-01-27 Thread Jason Molenda via lldb-commits
Author: jmolenda Date: Fri Jan 27 20:54:10 2017 New Revision: 293366 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293366&view=rev Log: One of the changes Jim made in r286288 (cleaning up the stop print header line, backtrace output) was to remove the current pc value from frames where we have sour

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29095: Open ELF core dumps with more than 64K sections

2017-01-27 Thread Eugene Birukov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
EugeneBi updated this revision to Diff 86148. EugeneBi added a comment. Used named constants for SHN_UNDEF and SHN_XINDEX sentinels. Unfortunately ELF.h lacks definition of PN_XNUM, so left it as a comment. https://reviews.llvm.org/D29095 Files: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ELFHeader.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29095: Open ELF core dumps with more than 64K sections

2017-01-27 Thread Eugene Birukov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
EugeneBi added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ELFHeader.cpp:108 + if (ok) { +if (e_phnum_hdr == 0x) + e_phnum = section_zero.sh_info; EugeneBi wrote: > EugeneBi wrote: > > davidb wrote: > > > Would this make more sense to

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29095: Open ELF core dumps with more than 64K sections

2017-01-27 Thread Eugene Birukov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
EugeneBi added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ELFHeader.cpp:108 + if (ok) { +if (e_phnum_hdr == 0x) + e_phnum = section_zero.sh_info; EugeneBi wrote: > davidb wrote: > > Would this make more sense to compare against a nam

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29095: Open ELF core dumps with more than 64K sections

2017-01-27 Thread Eugene Birukov via Phabricator via lldb-commits
EugeneBi added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ELFHeader.cpp:108 + if (ok) { +if (e_phnum_hdr == 0x) + e_phnum = section_zero.sh_info; davidb wrote: > Would this make more sense to compare against a named constant ELF::PN_

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293336 - NFC: Improve comments in SymbolFilePDB.cpp

2017-01-27 Thread Adrian McCarthy via lldb-commits
Author: amccarth Date: Fri Jan 27 15:42:28 2017 New Revision: 293336 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293336&view=rev Log: NFC: Improve comments in SymbolFilePDB.cpp Mostly this just fixes bad wrapping caused by the reformat, with tiny changes sprinkled here and there. Modified:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29144: LLDB: fix for TestCallThatThrows.py test fail

2017-01-27 Thread Boris Ulasevich via Phabricator via lldb-commits
boris.ulasevich added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D29144#659052, @jingham wrote: > What's special about the TestCallThatThrows test? Good question! It must be related with SetIgnoreBreakpoints(True) option used in the test: with this option StopInfoBreakpoint::PerformAction is not

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29144: LLDB: fix for TestCallThatThrows.py test fail

2017-01-27 Thread Jim Ingham via Phabricator via lldb-commits
jingham added a comment. If things were working generally the way your explanation states, then I don't understand why this doesn't cause all expression evaluations to fail. We have lots of tests that do expression evaluation. Why is only this test failing. Your change looks reasonable to me

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29144: LLDB: fix for TestCallThatThrows.py test fail

2017-01-27 Thread Boris Ulasevich via Phabricator via lldb-commits
boris.ulasevich updated this revision to Diff 86091. boris.ulasevich added a comment. I made another diff with using GetCompletedPlan call. Hope it makes the code clear. https://reviews.llvm.org/D29144 Files: lldb/source/Target/Process.cpp Index: lldb/source/Target/Process.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29144: LLDB: fix for TestCallThatThrows.py test fail

2017-01-27 Thread Boris Ulasevich via Phabricator via lldb-commits
boris.ulasevich added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D29144#657798, @jingham wrote: > When you go to pick the plan to report for the stop it should be the top of > the completed plan stack, the "thread plan to call function". Why in this > particular case is the bottom of the completed

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293269 - Unroll r292930 due to TestCallThatThrows test fail is not fixed in reasonable time.

2017-01-27 Thread Tim Hammerquist via lldb-commits
Thanks for following up! It's really appreciated! -Tim On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Boris Ulasevich via lldb-commits < lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Author: bulasevich > Date: Fri Jan 27 01:51:43 2017 > New Revision: 293269 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293269&vie

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29095: Open ELF core dumps with more than 64K sections

2017-01-27 Thread Dave Bozier via Phabricator via lldb-commits
davidb added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/ELF/ELFHeader.cpp:108 + if (ok) { +if (e_phnum_hdr == 0x) + e_phnum = section_zero.sh_info; Would this make more sense to compare against a named constant ELF::PN_XNUM? ==

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29126: [cmake] Remove VERSION property from executable targets

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. Thanks. I guess I'll give this one more week, and then commit it if noone objects. https://reviews.llvm.org/D29126 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293287 - Address post-commit review remarks

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Fri Jan 27 09:19:03 2017 New Revision: 293287 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293287&view=rev Log: Address post-commit review remarks Tamas pointed out that the macro name I used in r293282 was too vague. Rename it to better reflect what it is used for. Modified

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29095: Open ELF core dumps with more than 64K sections

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a subscriber: lldb-commits. labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I've added a quick test to demonstrate what I had in mind. > Unfortunately, unlike release_39 branch, I cannot open my core dump, but the > problem see

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293282 - Fix android-i386 build broken by previous commit

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Fri Jan 27 06:58:23 2017 New Revision: 293282 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293282&view=rev Log: Fix android-i386 build broken by previous commit I foolishly thought I could simplify the condition to cover all android targets. I was wrong - i386 headers don't d

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293281 - Refactor the android accept hack

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Fri Jan 27 06:23:51 2017 New Revision: 293281 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293281&view=rev Log: Refactor the android accept hack This moves the accept hack from the android toolchain file into LLDBConfig.cmake. This allows successful lldb android compilation w

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29215: [LLDB][MIPS] Fix TestMiniDumpNew

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath added a comment. Ok, I've just checked and this does not happen on windows. It does however happen (GetTriple() returning None) when we try to open the s390x core file (functionalities/postmortem/elf-core/linux-s390x.out). The test suite seems to be handling it fine. The only difference

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29215: [LLDB][MIPS] Fix TestMiniDumpNew

2017-01-27 Thread Nitesh Jain via Phabricator via lldb-commits
nitesh.jain added a comment. ERROR: test_two_cores_same_pid (TestMiniDumpNew.MiniDumpNewTestCase) Test that we handle the situation if we have two core files with the same PID -- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29215: [LLDB][MIPS] Fix TestMiniDumpNew

2017-01-27 Thread Nitesh Jain via Phabricator via lldb-commits
nitesh.jain added a comment. Hi Labath, I think on window ur host architecture is x86_64 hence when TargetList::CreateTargetInternal(..) is call, at line 269 the code is if (!prefer_platform_arch && arch.IsValid()) { if (!platform_sp->IsCompatibleArchitecture(arch, false, &platform_arch)

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29215: [LLDB][MIPS] Fix TestMiniDumpNew

2017-01-27 Thread Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
labath requested changes to this revision. labath added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. This seems like it's fixing the problem in the wrong place. Also, the assumption that the platform == host_platform is not correct (what about when the test is run on windows?) I th

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D29215: [LLDB][MIPS] Fix TestMiniDumpNew

2017-01-27 Thread Nitesh Jain via Phabricator via lldb-commits
nitesh.jain created this revision. In case of a core file, if the core file architecture(like x86_64) is incompatible with that of Host architecture(like Mips64) then platform is set to remote-platform. If the remote-platform is not connected then SBPlatform::GetTriple() will return none. Hence

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r293269 - Unroll r292930 due to TestCallThatThrows test fail is not fixed in reasonable time.

2017-01-27 Thread Boris Ulasevich via lldb-commits
Author: bulasevich Date: Fri Jan 27 01:51:43 2017 New Revision: 293269 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=293269&view=rev Log: Unroll r292930 due to TestCallThatThrows test fail is not fixed in reasonable time. Removed: lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/bre