[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: Make it possible for targets to define their own MCObjectFileInfo

flip1995 updated this revision to Diff 342345. flip1995 added a comment. [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo This untangles the MCContext and the MCObjectFileInfo. There is a circular dependency between MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo. Currently this dependency also exists during

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG632ebc4ab437: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo (authored by flip1995, committed by MaskRay). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101702: [clang-format] Add more support for C# 8 nullables

exv added a comment. Hey all, I'm really sorry for the noise, I screwed up my arc command to revise the submission. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101702/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101702

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

flip1995 added a comment. > I'll keep this open for a few days as it touches too many things. Sounds good  I used `arc diff`. The commits I made with `git` have my name and email attached. But it seems like `arc` doesn't use them? I'll figure it out tomorrow, can't be that hard, I hope.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101702: [clang-format] Add more support for C# 8 nullables

exv updated this revision to Diff 342521. exv added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: JDevlieghere. Fixing arc, hopefully? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101702/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101702 Files:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

MaskRay added a comment. In D101462#2733691 , @flip1995 wrote: > Not sure how the process from here on out is. I think it is important to > note, that I don't have push rights and someone else will have to land this > for me (I guess?). I'll keep this

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

MaskRay added a comment. In D101462#2733726 , @flip1995 wrote: >> I'll keep this open for a few days as it touches too many things. > > Sounds good  > >> but you'll need to provide your name and email > > ~~I used `arc diff`. The commits I made with

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

jrtc27 added a comment. In D101462#2739404 , @MaskRay wrote: > In D101462#2733726 , @flip1995 > wrote: > >>> I'll keep this open for a few days as it touches too many things. >> >> Sounds good  >> >>> but

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D100810: Use `GNUInstallDirs` to support custom installation dirs. -- LLVM

Ericson2314 added a subscriber: compnerd. Ericson2314 added a comment. @compnerd Would you like to review this one too (which the other you approved needs)? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100810/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

MaskRay accepted this revision. MaskRay added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Looks great! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101462/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101462

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

flip1995 added a comment. Not sure how the process from here on out is. I think it is important to note, that I don't have push rights and someone else will have to land this for me (I guess?). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101702: [clang-format] Add more support for C# 8 nullables

exv updated this revision to Diff 342520. exv added a comment. Herald added subscribers: llvm-commits, libcxx-commits, lldb-commits, Sanitizers, dcaballe, cota, teijeong, frasercrmck, dexonsmith, rdzhabarov, tatianashp, lxfind, dang, msifontes, jurahul, Kayjukh, grosul1, Joonsoo,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

flip1995 updated this revision to Diff 342354. flip1995 added a comment. Fix arc mistake... Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101462/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101462 Files: clang/lib/Parse/ParseStmtAsm.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

flip1995 updated this revision to Diff 343056. flip1995 added a comment. rebased Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101462/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101462 Files: clang/lib/Parse/ParseStmtAsm.cpp

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

anirudhp added a comment. Hi @flip1995 My apologies, but you might have to rebase this on the latest main. I introduced a `MCSubtargetInfo` field in https://reviews.llvm.org/D100975. Some of the existing changes to the file may not be needed anymore. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

flip1995 updated this revision to Diff 342352. flip1995 marked 3 inline comments as done. flip1995 edited the summary of this revision. flip1995 added a comment. Herald added subscribers: dcaballe, cota, teijeong, rdzhabarov, tatianashp, msifontes, jurahul, Kayjukh, grosul1, Joonsoo,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102085: Add an "interrupt timeout" to Process, fix a bug in handling interrupt timeouts in

jingham created this revision. jingham added reviewers: clayborg, labath, JDevlieghere. jingham requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits. This patch started as an attempt to rationalize the handling of the timeout for interrupting a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

kastiglione added a comment. @dblaikie I have checked lldb, it builds cleanly. In the downstream swift branch of lldb there were a couple issues. I'll check llvm. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D102092/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

kastiglione added a comment. Didn't mean to self-accept this, so I resigned as reviewer. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D102092/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D102092 ___ lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102085: Add an "interrupt timeout" to Process, fix a bug in handling interrupt timeouts in

jingham updated this revision to Diff 343785. jingham added a comment. I coalesced the timeout & no-timeout versions of GDBRemoteClientBase::SendPacketAndWaitForResponse and GDBRemoteClientBase::Lock::Lock as you suggested. I didn't use an Optional. That seems overkill when there's a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

kastiglione created this revision. kastiglione added reviewers: JDevlieghere, aprantl, jasonmolenda. Herald added a subscriber: mgorny. kastiglione requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: LLDB. Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits. Enable `-Wmisleading-indentation` to

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

dblaikie added a comment. might as well enable it for LLVM more generally? (though probably lldb specifically, and lots of llvm more generally, would need cleanup before this is enabled? Have you checked if lldb or other parts of llvm build cleanly with this warning enabled?) Repository:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

teemperor added a comment. I think some people are already building with this warning + -Werror so this should be fine (Apparently that list of people includes me and Stella as I fixed a warning that broke the build in https://reviews.llvm.org/D99694#2671667 ) Repository: rG LLVM Github

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102085: Add an "interrupt timeout" to Process, fix a bug in handling interrupt timeouts in

jingham added a comment. BTW, I generally agree that passing values in parameters that are always going to be used internally anyway is ugly and it's better to store them in an ivar. But in this case, the value was going to get used in some cases and not in others, which storing it as a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102085: Add an "interrupt timeout" to Process, fix a bug in handling interrupt timeouts in

jingham added a comment. I don't see the change as "adding a bunch of timeouts", since what it mostly did was remove a bunch of send_async = false's. For all the clients that don't care about a timeout, I removed the send_async parameter, and for those that did I replaced it with a timeout.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102085: Add an "interrupt timeout" to Process, fix a bug in handling interrupt timeouts in

clayborg added a comment. In D102085#2745450 , @jingham wrote: > I don't see the change as "adding a bunch of timeouts", since what it mostly > did was remove a bunch of send_async = false's. For all the clients that > don't care about a timeout, I

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

kastiglione updated this revision to Diff 343773. kastiglione added a comment. Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Enable for llvm. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D102092/new/

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102092: [lldb] Enable -Wmisleading-indentation

dblaikie accepted this revision. dblaikie added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Sounds good to me if - if the build (of ~everything in the monorepo) is clean - and do please keep an eye on the buildbots when this is committed as there's likely to be cleanup here and

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D102085: Add an "interrupt timeout" to Process, fix a bug in handling interrupt timeouts in

clayborg added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteClientBase.cpp:370 + m_should_interrupt(true), m_did_interrupt(false) { + SyncWithContinueThread(); + if (m_acquired) if "interrupt_timeout" is optional, it can