[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r299147 - Don't add a newline if the object description already has one.

Author: jingham Date: Thu Mar 30 20:32:57 2017 New Revision: 299147 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=299147=rev Log: Don't add a newline if the object description already has one. Modified: lldb/trunk/source/DataFormatters/ValueObjectPrinter.cpp Modified:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31451: New C++ function name parsing logic

eugene marked 4 inline comments as done. eugene added a comment. > I think we should do some performance measurements to see whether this needs > more optimising or it's fine as is. > > I propose the following benchmark: > > bin/lldb bin/clang > > make sure clang is statically linked >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31485: Verify memory address range validity in GDBRemoteCommunicationClient

clayborg accepted this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Looks good. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31485 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31450: Battery of NetBSD support improvements

krytarowski added a comment. Thanks! I noted that I introduced some bugs.. but I will fix them in future revisions. I will move on to threads now. FPR/watchpoints will be done later, on the cost on adding some code for cores and helping out with base system work. LLDB/NetBSD is now out of the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31451: New C++ function name parsing logic

eugene updated this revision to Diff 93572. eugene added a comment. Addressing code-review comments. Most notable change: MethodName::Parse() tries simple version of name parser, before invoking full power of CPlusPlusNameParser. It really helps with the perf. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31451

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31485: Verify memory address range validity in GDBRemoteCommunicationClient

xiaobai marked an inline comment as done. xiaobai added inline comments. Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationClient.cpp:1506-1510 + // We got an invalid address range back + if (!region_info.GetRange().IsValid()) { +

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31485: Verify memory address range validity in GDBRemoteCommunicationClient

xiaobai updated this revision to Diff 93566. xiaobai added a comment. Added unit tests for the method and changed the logic according to clayborg's suggestion. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31485 Files: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationClient.cpp

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:47:39PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > On czw, 2017-03-30 at 21:37 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:00:15PM +, Chris Bieneman via Phabricator > > wrote: > > > ExecutionEngine headers directly reference symbols from RuntimeDyld, > > > so

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r299116 - add NetBSD files to Xcode project to resolve failure from r299109

Author: penryu Date: Thu Mar 30 16:27:51 2017 New Revision: 299116 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=299116=rev Log: add NetBSD files to Xcode project to resolve failure from r299109 Modified: lldb/trunk/lldb.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj Modified:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31485: Verify memory address range validity in GDBRemoteCommunicationClient

clayborg requested changes to this revision. clayborg added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Simple logic change so we don't check the range validity more than once. Comment at:

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

On czw, 2017-03-30 at 13:55 -0700, Chris Bieneman wrote: > I had a talk with Lang about the ExecutionEngine library structuring, and it > sounds like there are some problems there that need to be worked out. > > Luckily for this specific case, I think the solution is actually quite simple: > >

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

I had a talk with Lang about the ExecutionEngine library structuring, and it sounds like there are some problems there that need to be worked out. Luckily for this specific case, I think the solution is actually quite simple: ``` diff --git a/include/llvm/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.h

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

On czw, 2017-03-30 at 21:37 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:00:15PM +, Chris Bieneman via Phabricator > wrote: > > ExecutionEngine headers directly reference symbols from RuntimeDyld, > > so we should enforce a requirement that anyone using ExeuctionEngine > >

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r299109 - Battery of NetBSD support improvements

Author: kamil Date: Thu Mar 30 15:25:29 2017 New Revision: 299109 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=299109=rev Log: Battery of NetBSD support improvements Summary: Include initial support for: - single step mode (PT_STEP) - single step trap handling (TRAP_TRACE) - exec() trap

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31371: Stop calling ValueObject::SetName from synthetic child providers

Thanks. Jim > On Mar 30, 2017, at 1:16 PM, Tamas Berghammer wrote: > > Created bug for exposing ValueObject::Clone as SB API: > http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32477 > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:04 PM Jim Ingham via Phabricator >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31366: Do not dereference std::unique_ptr by default

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. MacOS hasn't shipped with gcc for a while now. If you were serious about using gcc & its STL implementation you would install your own copies of the tools & libraries. So what's on the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31450: Battery of NetBSD support improvements

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Thank you. Keep up the good work. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D31450 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31371: Stop calling ValueObject::SetName from synthetic child providers

Created bug for exposing ValueObject::Clone as SB API: http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32477 On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:04 PM Jim Ingham via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > jingham accepted this revision. > jingham added a comment. > This revision is now accepted and ready

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31366: Do not dereference std::unique_ptr by default

tberghammer added a comment. I tried it out on OSX and the problem is that version of libstdc++ shipping with every recent OSX version (don't know about old ones) is 4.2.1 (last version with GPL v2) what doesn't support std::unique_ptr (supported since 4.3). Because of this I think the correct

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31371: Stop calling ValueObject::SetName from synthetic child providers

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Good. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31371 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31371: Stop calling ValueObject::SetName from synthetic child providers

I see. Might be worth filing an enhancement request to expose Clone so you can do this in a Python synthetic child provider. But there's no reason that lack should block this change. Jim > On Mar 30, 2017, at 12:51 PM, Tamas Berghammer wrote: > > It is possible to

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31368: Add support for sythetic operator dereference

jingham accepted this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Excellent! https://reviews.llvm.org/D31368 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31368: Add support for sythetic operator dereference

tberghammer updated this revision to Diff 93529. tberghammer added a comment. Fix grammer for the html documentation. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31368 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/data-formatter/data-formatter-stl/libstdcpp/unique_ptr/TestDataFormatterStdUniquePtr.py

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31371: Stop calling ValueObject::SetName from synthetic child providers

tberghammer updated this revision to Diff 93528. tberghammer added a comment. Fix typos in the comments https://reviews.llvm.org/D31371 Files: include/lldb/Core/ValueObject.h source/Core/ValueObject.cpp source/DataFormatters/VectorType.cpp

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31371: Stop calling ValueObject::SetName from synthetic child providers

It is possible to vend one of the actual backing object as a synthetic child using the SB API. What is not possible from the SB API at the moment (we might want to fix it) is to vend one of the actual backing object with a different name then the underlying object itself. You can still say that

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31450: Battery of NetBSD support improvements

krytarowski added a comment. Thanks! Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D31450 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31368: Add support for sythetic operator dereference

jingham requested changes to this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. One grammar comment in the docs, and then this is good. Comment at: www/varformats.html:1071 [3] This method is optional (starting with SVN revision 219330).

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31450: Battery of NetBSD support improvements

jingham resigned from this revision. jingham added a comment. Kyril, I haven't been involved in the lldb-server parts of lldb. Greg sketched out those interfaces and mostly folks working on Windows & Linux have fleshed them out. I haven't been following the design discussions for lldb-server,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31368: Add support for sythetic operator dereference

tberghammer updated this revision to Diff 93525. tberghammer added a comment. Add documentation to the website https://reviews.llvm.org/D31368 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/data-formatter/data-formatter-stl/libstdcpp/unique_ptr/TestDataFormatterStdUniquePtr.py

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:00:15PM +, Chris Bieneman via Phabricator wrote: > ExecutionEngine headers directly reference symbols from RuntimeDyld, > so we should enforce a requirement that anyone using ExeuctionEngine > also link RuntimeDyld. This works today as expected for static archive >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31450: Battery of NetBSD support improvements

krytarowski updated this revision to Diff 93524. krytarowski added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: srhines. Apply changes from review. No visible regressions in "check-lldb". Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D31450 Files: source/Host/common/Host.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

mgorny added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31367#714305, @beanz wrote: > Please revert your patch. It is *not* the right solution and is masking > underlying problems. Reverted in r299095. Now I'd really appreciate some help in figuring out how to fix it properly. >

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r299095 - Revert r298776 - Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld ...

Author: mgorny Date: Thu Mar 30 13:24:07 2017 New Revision: 299095 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=299095=rev Log: Revert r298776 - Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld ... This needs to be addressed within LLVM itself. Modified:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

beanz added a comment. Please revert your patch. It is *not* the right solution and is masking underlying problems. ExecutionEngine headers directly reference symbols from RuntimeDyld, so we should enforce a requirement that anyone using ExeuctionEngine also link RuntimeDyld. This works today

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

beanz added a comment. This is definitely not the right fix. Please revert. ExecutionEngine's LLVMBuild.txt file explicitly lists that RuntimeDyld is a required library of ExecutionEngine (as well as a few others). LLVM's CMake should be connecting that as an explicit dependency, and for some

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31451: New C++ function name parsing logic

labath added a comment. I cant help but feel that this could have been done in a simpler way, but then again, some of the cases you have dug up are quite tricky. I think we should do some performance measurements to see whether this needs more optimising or it's fine as is. I propose the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31485: Verify memory address range validity in GDBRemoteCommunicationClient

labath added a comment. The additional check sounds fine. There's a test for this class in unittests/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationClientTest.cpp where you can add a test for this behavior. https://reviews.llvm.org/D31485 ___

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D31367: Expression: add missing linkage to RuntimeDyld component

mgorny added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31367#713472, @labath wrote: > We don't depend on the RuntimeDyld component of llvm directy -- we only use > it indirectly through the ExecutionEngine component. Shouldn't that be > reflected as a dependency in the build system somehow, so