jingham updated this revision to Diff 265632.
jingham added a comment.
Address review comments
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80350/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80350
Files:
lldb/include/lldb/lldb-enumerations.h
lldb/source/Ex
jingham marked an inline comment as done.
jingham added inline comments.
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/Process.cpp:4671
+ "the expression was running.",
+ thread_id);
+return eExpressionThreadVanished;
aprantl wrote:
> Is it useful to
aprantl added a comment.
This looks reasonable based on my limited knowledge.
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/Process.cpp:4671
+ "the expression was running.",
+ thread_id);
+return eExpressionThreadVanished;
Is it useful to both log
jasonmolenda added a comment.
I skimmed it, I guess the one question that comes to mind is how this will
behave if we an operating system thread provider plugin active, where it may
not actually list all of the threads that exist -- where we try to be tolerant
of threads disappearing and then r
jingham updated this revision to Diff 265608.
jingham added a comment.
clang-format
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80350/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80350
Files:
lldb/include/lldb/lldb-enumerations.h
lldb/source/Expression/Fu
jingham created this revision.
Herald added a project: LLDB.
Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
It is possible that the thread we are running a function on could exit while we
are waiting for the function call to return.
We sort of handled that case before, but it really only worked by acc
