[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109795: [MachCore] Report arm64 thread exception state

jasonmolenda added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/mach-core/ThreadMachCore.cpp:112 + auto exception_class = + static_cast(esr_val >> 26); + if (exception_class != shafik wrote: > Does `26` have a meaning?

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109795: [MachCore] Report arm64 thread exception state

jasonmolenda added a comment. This is much more comprehensive than what I was thinking of, nicely done. The mapping of the Exception Class in the esr reg to a name is AArch64 specific, not Apple specific, isn't it? I haven't looked in the ARM ARM, but I suspect it's just the specific names

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109795: [MachCore] Report arm64 thread exception state

shafik added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/include/lldb/Target/AppleArm64ExceptionClass.h:14 + +enum class AppleArm64ExceptionClass : unsigned { +#define APPLE_ARM64_EXCEPTION_CLASS(Name, Code) Name = Code, We should use fixed sized integer types whenever

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109797: Fix rendezvous for rebase_exec=true case

emrekultursay created this revision. emrekultursay requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits. When rebase_exec=true in DidAttach(), all modules are loaded before the rendezvous breakpoint is set, which means the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109795: [MachCore] Report arm64 thread exception state

vsk updated this revision to Diff 372591. vsk added a comment. - Add license header to the .def file. - (I'm not sure whether/how this change can be tested, any pointers appreciated.) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109795/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109795: [MachCore] Report arm64 thread exception state

vsk created this revision. vsk added reviewers: jasonmolenda, jingham, JDevlieghere. Herald added subscribers: zzheng, omjavaid, pengfei, kristof.beyls. vsk requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. A MachO userspace corefile may contain LC_THREAD commands which specify

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109738: [lldb] Fix bug 38317 - Address breakpoints don't work if set before the process launches

jingham added a comment. BTW, do you know what change made this stop working? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109738/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109738 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109738: [lldb] Fix bug 38317 - Address breakpoints don't work if set before the process launches

jingham requested changes to this revision. jingham added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. In the future, can you generate patches with context (i.e. pass -U to "git diff" or "git show"), it's a lot easier to read patches with context. This doesn't seem like the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109738: [lldb] Fix bug 38317 - Address breakpoints don't work if set before the process launches

ted added a comment. I created the original bug because a change made LLDB stop working on address breakpoints if they were created before the program is run. Setting a breakpoint on an address is a typical case with embedded applications, especially if you want to debug startup code. I took

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102428: [StopInfoMachException] Summarize arm64e BLRAx/LDRAx auth failures

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG66902a32c838: [StopInfoMachException] Summarize arm64e BLRAx/LDRAx auth failures (authored by vsk). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] 66902a3 - [StopInfoMachException] Summarize arm64e BLRAx/LDRAx auth failures

Author: Vedant Kumar Date: 2021-09-14T13:31:52-07:00 New Revision: 66902a32c83809d26662f76e4107d5dd777610c3 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/66902a32c83809d26662f76e4107d5dd777610c3 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/66902a32c83809d26662f76e4107d5dd777610c3.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109779: [LLDB] [Minidump] Fix format string warnings on Windows

MaskRay added a comment. I fixed this in e69d359841b6358f1d17569212ef8cf91244ca11 and fixed some style issues. --- This needs extra care. While Clang -Wformat flags printf("%llu", (size_t)3); warning: format

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109785: [lldb] Refactor and rename CPlusPlusLanguage::FindAlternateFunctionManglings

bulbazord created this revision. bulbazord added reviewers: clayborg, teemperor, jingham, JDevlieghere, labath. bulbazord requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. I have 2 goals with this change: 1. Disambiguate between CPlusPlus::FindAlternateFunctionManglings and

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109779: [LLDB] [Minidump] Fix format string warnings on Windows

mstorsjo abandoned this revision. mstorsjo added a comment. Oh, sorry, I worked on a checkout a couple weeks old, where I ran into this warning. It does indeed seem to be fixed in the current git main branch. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109779: [LLDB] [Minidump] Fix format string warnings on Windows

bulbazord added a reviewer: MaskRay. bulbazord added a comment. Adding MaskRay who fixed something similar to this yesterday. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109779/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109779

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109779: [LLDB] [Minidump] Fix format string warnings on Windows

mstorsjo created this revision. mstorsjo added a reviewer: labath. mstorsjo requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. These variables are 'size_t' and thus should use %zu. On Windows, 'long' is always 32 bit. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109778: [lldb] [Windows] Fix an incorrect assert in NativeRegisterContextWindows_arm

mstorsjo created this revision. mstorsjo added a reviewer: labath. Herald added a subscriber: kristof.beyls. mstorsjo requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. This codepath hadn't been exercised in a build with asserts before. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109777: [lldb] [Windows] Fix continuing from breakpoints and singlestepping on ARM/AArch64

mstorsjo created this revision. mstorsjo added a reviewer: labath. Herald added a subscriber: kristof.beyls. mstorsjo requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. Based on suggestions by Eric Youngdale. This fixes https://llvm.org/PR51673. Repository: rG LLVM Github

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] f22c63b - [lldb/test] Start pexpect tests with a custom HOME

Thanks! Just FYI, I was actually about to open a review for allowing configuring the history directory which should also address this. Am Di., 14. Sept. 2021 um 15:18 Uhr schrieb Pavel Labath via lldb-commits : > > > Author: Pavel Labath > Date: 2021-09-14T15:17:10+02:00 > New Revision:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D62732: [RISCV] Add SystemV ABI

jrtc27 added a comment. In D62732#2995111 , @MaskRay wrote: > Hi Luís, is this still needed after D86292 ? > Or are there missing pieces? > @felixonmars reported that https://archriscv.felixc.at/.status/logs/lldb.log >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109483: [APInt] Normalize naming on keep constructors / predicate methods.

lattner added a comment. > What is a "keep constructor"? Good question, I'm not sure. I think I meant to say "key constructors". Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109483/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109483

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109483: [APInt] Normalize naming on keep constructors / predicate methods.

foad added a comment. What is a "keep constructor"? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109483/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109483 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D62732: [RISCV] Add SystemV ABI

MaskRay added a subscriber: felixonmars. MaskRay added a comment. Hi Luis, is this still needed after D86292 ? Or are there missing pieces? @felixonmars reported that https://archriscv.felixc.at/.status/logs/lldb.log still failed to build on riscv64 Arch Linux.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109695: [lldb] [Process/gdb-remote] Add x31 AArch64 register for gdbserver

labath added a comment. In D109695#2999221 , @mgorny wrote: > In D109695#2999171 , @labath wrote: > >> Let's take a step back. First, I'd like to understand why are you adding a >> whole new register, instead of

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D108831: [lldb] [gdb-remote] Add x86_64 pseudo-registers when using gdbserver

labath added a comment. In D108831#2999227 , @mgorny wrote: > Another question: should we aim to remove the 'redundant afterwards' bits > from lldb-server, and fill them in from client side entirely? I don't think > our process plugins really need

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] f22c63b - [lldb/test] Start pexpect tests with a custom HOME

Author: Pavel Labath Date: 2021-09-14T15:17:10+02:00 New Revision: f22c63b41bda01163a88b0bb9887a9324810732f URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f22c63b41bda01163a88b0bb9887a9324810732f DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f22c63b41bda01163a88b0bb9887a9324810732f.diff

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D108831: [lldb] [gdb-remote] Add x86_64 pseudo-registers when using gdbserver

mgorny added a comment. Another question: should we aim to remove the 'redundant afterwards' bits from lldb-server, and fill them in from client side entirely? I don't think our process plugins really need knowledge of EAX etc., and it would reduce the duplication a fair bit. Also I'm not

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109695: [lldb] [Process/gdb-remote] Add x31 AArch64 register for gdbserver

mgorny added a comment. In D109695#2999171 , @labath wrote: > Let's take a step back. First, I'd like to understand why are you adding a > whole new register, instead of just an alias (alt_name) for an existing > register. Well, I was thinking 'what

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D108831: [lldb] [gdb-remote] Add x86_64 pseudo-registers when using gdbserver

labath added a comment. This is an interesting problem. I don't yet know how, but as I alluded to in the other patch, my instinct would be to find a way to put this into the ABI class, in order to keep the "fill in bits not provided by debug server" code in a single place. CHANGES SINCE LAST

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109691: [lldb] [ABI/AArch64] Recognize special regs by their xN names too

labath accepted this revision. labath added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. seems reasonable CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109691/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109691 ___ lldb-commits mailing list

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D109695: [lldb] [Process/gdb-remote] Add x31 AArch64 register for gdbserver

labath requested changes to this revision. labath added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Let's take a step back. First, I'd like to understand why are you adding a whole new register, instead of just an alias (alt_name) for an existing register. And second, have you

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D105998: Create synthetic symbol names on demand to improve memory consumption and startup times.

wallace closed this revision. wallace added a comment. This was commited by ec1a49170129d Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D105998/new/