[lldb-dev] LLVM 10.0.1 release update.

Hi, I'm still working through a number of backport requests for 10.0.1, so I'm going to postpone -rc2 until next week. -Tom ___ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

[lldb-dev] [Bug 35857] Deprecate/remove the lldb private regex implementation

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35857 Jordan Rupprecht changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ruppre...@google.com Resolution|---

Re: [lldb-dev] buildbot slave able to run on python3

Hello Jan, Yes. The buildbot migration to buildbot-2.x is a work in progress. Thanks Galina On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:51 AM Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Hi Galina, > > there was: > [llvm-dev] Buildbot cleaning for zorg upgrade > >

Re: [lldb-dev] [11.0.0 Release] Release schedule

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:32 PM Hans Wennborg wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > Some folks have already asked for a rough schedule for LLVM 11, so I > think it's time to send this. > > My proposal is to essentially follow the same procedure as last time, > which would mean: > > - 15 July 2020:

[lldb-dev] buildbot slave able to run on python3

Hi Galina, there was: [llvm-dev] Buildbot cleaning for zorg upgrade https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-February/139503.html "Zorg upgrade to a recent version of buildbot is coming." Do I understand it correctly there is a plan we could start using buildbot-2.x

[lldb-dev] Last call for fixes for the 10.0.1 release

Hi, Thursday is the last day I'll be accepting fixes for the 10.0.1 release. If there is a fix you want to get in, please let me know before then. Thanks, Tom ___ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org

[lldb-dev] 2020 Virtual LLVM Developers' Meeting - Call for presentations!

All developers and users of LLVM and related sub-projects are invited to present at the first virtual 2020 LLVM Developers’ Meeting ! We are looking for the following proposals: Technical Talks (25-30 minutes including Q): Talks on: LLVM Infrastructure,Clang and

[lldb-dev] New Dates for 2020 Virtual LLVM Dev Mtg

In order to not conflict with the Grace Hopper Conference, which has now gone virtual and is occurring the whole last week of September, we are moving the 2020 Virtual LLVM Developer’s Conference to October 6-8. The conference will span 3 days and the exact times are still being determined.

[lldb-dev] [11.0.0 Release] Release schedule

Hello everyone, Some folks have already asked for a rough schedule for LLVM 11, so I think it's time to send this. My proposal is to essentially follow the same procedure as last time, which would mean: - 15 July 2020: Create the release branch. RC1 ships soon after. - 31 July 2020: RC2 - 26

[lldb-dev] state of i386 linux

Hi lldb-dev, I use lldb on x86_64 linux all the time, so naturally I expected it to work on i386. Unfortunately this is not the case. It has been suggested that it is "highly untested for 32-bit Intel if not said unimplemented" [1]. Is this the case? If not, how much work remains to implement

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45886] Wrong variable value change during debugging at Og

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45886 Jan Kratochvil changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|enhancement |normal

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46038] Wrong backtrace information at Og

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46038 Davide Italiano changed: What|Removed |Added Version|trunk |unspecified

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45944] LLDB does not support DW_OP_GNU_entry_value alias for DW_OP_entry_value

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45944 Vedant Kumar changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed By Commit(s)||bddd2888264492a6deb0d447ee6 |

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46206] New: Cannot inspect a std::wstring variable (VSCode + CodeLLDB + lldb + node-gyp + MSBuild + Windows 10)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46206 Bug ID: 46206 Summary: Cannot inspect a std::wstring variable (VSCode + CodeLLDB + lldb + node-gyp + MSBuild + Windows 10) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46181] LLDB show a wrong value for function argument

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46181 Jan Kratochvil changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org |jan.kratoch...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 08:19:57PM -0700, Tom Stellard via lldb-dev wrote: > On 05/25/2020 05:48 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I would like t

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46181] LLDB show a wrong value for function argument

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46181 Luca Massarelli changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassignedb...@nondot.org |lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46158] New: Setting Breakpoints Dependent on Microsoft Compiler Environment

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46158 Bug ID: 46158 Summary: Setting Breakpoints Dependent on Microsoft Compiler Environment Product: lldb Version: 10.0 Hardware: PC OS: Windows 2000

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46149] New: Python API: process will never stopped at a breakpoint when using LaunchSimple (lldb trunk)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46149 Bug ID: 46149 Summary: Python API: process will never stopped at a breakpoint when using LaunchSimple (lldb trunk) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release qualification criteria

On 05/25/2020 06:10 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm splitting this discussion off of my RFC for release process >> changes. >> >> We currently have no official release qualification criteria. In >> other words,

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On 05/27/2020 01:04 PM, Machiel van Hooren wrote: > Hi, > > In this release as well as the 10.0.0 release, llvm fails to build on Windows > with the latest Visual Studio version (16.6.0) when building for debug. > See https://llvm.discourse.group/t/llvm-not-building-in-vusual-studio/1139/3 >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release process changes

That all makes sense to me. The new process sgtm. On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 5:20 AM Tom Stellard wrote: > > On 05/25/2020 05:48 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I would like to propose a few changes to the

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

Hi, Uploaded binaries for ARM & AArch64: e7cdf76722c9f5b90ec3f5d0e6cf5545badc6a7eaf8477b764a25845aee9a844 clang+llvm-10.0.1-rc1-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.xz a11427f38283a522a22f4799c40518b09b72bdd4170ecb456544b459f74d1fc3 clang+llvm-10.0.1-rc1-armv7a-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz AArch64 is green (yay!

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On 05/25/2020 05:48 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The >> current process is documented here: >> https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html >> >>

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes

This set of changes sounds good to me. Thanks! -eric On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 12:00 PM Tom Stellard via llvm-dev < llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The > current process is documented here: >

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46049] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O2

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46049 Bug ID: 46049 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O2 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46047] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O3

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46047 Bug ID: 46047 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O3 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On 26 May 2020, at 18:24, Tom Stellard wrote: On 05/21/2020 05:54 PM, John McCall wrote: On 21 May 2020, at 14:59, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote: Hi, I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The current process is documented here:

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:22 AM Renato Golin via cfe-dev wrote: > > On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 23:10, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev > wrote: > > +1 > > > > Maybe even stronger than "is allowed to commit", I think we should > > really think about it as the release manager owning the branch, and > > has

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On 05/21/2020 05:54 PM, John McCall wrote: > On 21 May 2020, at 14:59, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The >> current process is documented here: >> https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html >> >> There are two

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes

These changes and clarifications make sense to me. On Thu, 21 May 2020, 12:00 Tom Stellard via llvm-dev, < llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The > current process is documented here: >

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 23:10, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: > +1 > > Maybe even stronger than "is allowed to commit", I think we should > really think about it as the release manager owning the branch, and > has full authority over what goes into it or not. Consulting code > owners often

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release qualification criteria

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm splitting this discussion off of my RFC for release process > changes. > > We currently have no official release qualification criteria. In > other words, we don't have any blocking tests that need to pass in >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The > current process is documented here: > https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html > > There are two parts to this proposal. The first is a

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:22 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and > uploading > binaries. > > If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about > a month > to get your fix

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46046] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O1

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46046 Bug ID: 46046 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O1 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: RESOLVED Severity: enhancement

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46045] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O1

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46045 Bug ID: 46045 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O1 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46040] Inconsistent debug info between step and stepi at -O1

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46040 Yibiao Yang (杨已彪) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||keith.wal...@arm.com, |

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46040] New: Inconsistent debug info between step and stepi at -O1

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46040 Bug ID: 46040 Summary: Inconsistent debug info between step and stepi at -O1 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45653] DWP_OP(_GNU)_entry_value not used correctly to display clobbered parameter value (in dwarf4 and dwarf5)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45653 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CONFIRMED

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46032] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O0

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46032 Bug ID: 46032 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O0 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46030] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O1 (-O0 is correct)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46030 Bug ID: 46030 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O1 (-O0 is correct) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46029] New: inconsistent behaviors at -O3 (-O0 is correct)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46029 Bug ID: 46029 Summary: inconsistent behaviors at -O3 (-O0 is correct) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity:

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes

On 21 May 2020, at 14:59, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote: Hi, I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The current process is documented here: https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html There are two parts to this proposal. The first is a list of

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [Release-testers] RFC: Release process changes

On 05/21/2020 05:38 PM, Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > On 2020-05-21, Michał Górny via cfe-dev wrote: >> On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 11:59 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The >>> current process is documented

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [Release-testers] RFC: Release process changes

On 2020-05-21, Michał Górny via cfe-dev wrote: >On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 11:59 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers >wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The >> current process is documented here: >> https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes

All of this sounds reasonable to me, but we don't directly follow the upstream release cadence so I'm an interested observer at most. Philip On 5/21/20 11:59 AM, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote: Hi, I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The current process is

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:22 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and > uploading > binaries. > > If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about > a month > to get your fix

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] RFC: Release process changes

On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 11:59 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The > current process is documented here: > https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html > > There are two parts to this proposal. The first

[lldb-dev] RFC: Release qualification criteria

Hi, I'm splitting this discussion off of my RFC for release process changes. We currently have no official release qualification criteria. In other words, we don't have any blocking tests that need to pass in order to make a new release. We do time-based releases, which is not always

[lldb-dev] RFC: Release process changes

Hi, I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The current process is documented here: https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html There are two parts to this proposal. The first is a list of clarifications, which are things we are currently doing that aren't

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On 20 May 2020, at 03:22, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > > I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and > uploading > binaries. > > If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about > a month > to get your fix in. To request

[lldb-dev] [Bug 46014] New: inconsistent behaviors for calling function va_arg() at -O3 (-O0 is correct)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46014 Bug ID: 46014 Summary: inconsistent behaviors for calling function va_arg() at -O3 (-O0 is correct) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux

Re: [lldb-dev] LLDB single-stepping problem on remote debugging

t; and you will find a complete example of packets that are send and all of the possible key/value pairs you can respond with. Once you have correct registers that LLDB can dynamically build a register context with, you will be able to proceed with stepping and expect to have better results. G

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:23 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > > Hi, > > I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and > uploading > binaries. > > If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about > a month > to get your fix in.

[lldb-dev] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

Hi, I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about a month to get your fix in. To request a patch be backported to the release/10.x branch, file a bug and mark it as a

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45998] New: volatile lead to inconsistent behaviors between step-by-step and stepi-by-stepi in lldb

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45998 Bug ID: 45998 Summary: volatile lead to inconsistent behaviors between step-by-step and stepi-by-stepi in lldb Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS:

Re: [lldb-dev] [EXT] [llvm-dev] LLVM 10.0.1-rc1 release update

On 05/19/2020 09:30 AM, Wei Zhao wrote: > Hi Tom, > > We just upstreamed machine instruction model for Marvell's upcoming processor > ThunderX3. This link is https://reviews.llvm.org/D78129/new/ > > Our customers asked us if we can put it on 10.0.1 release as that will meet > their immediate

Re: [lldb-dev] Pre-merge lldb testing

on't think this needs to block anything, but I want to make sure everyone is aware of the possible issues. pl On 17/05/2020 03:08, Eric Christopher via lldb-dev wrote: > > > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 12:18 PM Greg Clayton <mailto:clayb...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > >

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45988] New: SBValue.GetNumChildren() returns wrong value for double indirections

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45988 Bug ID: 45988 Summary: SBValue.GetNumChildren() returns wrong value for double indirections Product: lldb Version: 10.0 Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 44331] LLDB crashes in expression evaluation (in codegen)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44331 Jaroslav Sevcik changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[lldb-dev] [Bug 43561] Unwind augmentation on x86 is off by one instruction

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43561 Jaroslav Sevcik changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[lldb-dev] LLVM 10.0.1-rc1 release update

Hi, All the patches for LLVM 10.0.1-rc1 have been merged, and I'm just waiting for the CI jobs to finish. I will tag the release tomorrow if all goes well. Don't worry if you have a change that didn't make it into LLVM 10.0.1-rc1, there is still another month to merge changes before LLVM

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45981] New: StringRef::getAsInteger doesn't support "+1"

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45981 Bug ID: 45981 Summary: StringRef::getAsInteger doesn't support "+1" Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

Re: [lldb-dev] Unable to use Vi mode in LLDB console on Linux

key bindings and LLDB does a bunch of bindings for custom >> things which you won't want to use. >> >>> On May 16, 2020, at 10:34 AM, Alvin Ye via lldb-dev >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm using LLDB installed as Arch Linux pa

Re: [lldb-dev] Unable to use Vi mode in LLDB console on Linux

16, 2020, at 10:34 AM, Alvin Ye via lldb-dev > > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I'm using LLDB installed as Arch Linux package. > > > > % lldb -v > > lldb version 10.0.0 > > > > % cat ~/.editrc > > bind -v > > > > >

Re: [lldb-dev] Pre-merge lldb testing

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 12:18 PM Greg Clayton wrote: > > > On May 15, 2020, at 7:04 PM, Eric Christopher via lldb-dev < > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi All, > > We've been testing[1] a number of patches upstream by default via some > pre-merge chec

Re: [lldb-dev] Unable to use Vi mode in LLDB console on Linux

There are some posts about issues with using the "bind -v". It seems it will delete all other key bindings and LLDB does a bunch of bindings for custom things which you won't want to use. > On May 16, 2020, at 10:34 AM, Alvin Ye via lldb-dev > wrote: > > Hello, > &

Re: [lldb-dev] Pre-merge lldb testing

> On May 15, 2020, at 7:04 PM, Eric Christopher via lldb-dev > wrote: > > Hi All, > > We've been testing[1] a number of patches upstream by default via some > pre-merge checks in phabricator. I was thinking of turning them on for lldb > as well. Mostly it well just

[lldb-dev] Unable to use Vi mode in LLDB console on Linux

Hello, I'm using LLDB installed as Arch Linux package. % lldb -v lldb version 10.0.0 % cat ~/.editrc bind -v I'm not able to use vi keybindings like j, k cycle through commands in the lldb console. It would be great if someone could help me with this issue. Thanks, Alvin

[lldb-dev] Pre-merge lldb testing

Hi All, We've been testing[1] a number of patches upstream by default via some pre-merge checks in phabricator. I was thinking of turning them on for lldb as well. Mostly it well just help people know whether or not they've broken lldb before they commit something, but won't stop committing or do

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45944] New: LLDB print wrong value for a parameter at Og

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45944 Bug ID: 45944 Summary: LLDB print wrong value for a parameter at Og Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: wrong-debug

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

On 14/05/2020 11:56, Jaroslav Sevcik wrote: > > The svr4 support seems to be off by > default:  > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/2974b3c566d68f1d7c907f891137cf0292dd35aa/lldb/source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/ProcessGDBRemoteProperties.td#L14 > > It would definitely make sense to turn

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45920] lldb wrongly stopped at a statement within a nested for statement by si (step instruction)

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45920 Jeremy Morse changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||38768 Version|unspecified

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

AM Pavel Labath via lldb-dev < lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 14/05/2020 03:50, Emre Kultursay via lldb-dev wrote: > > One thing I want to try is "settings set > > plugin.process.gdb-remote.use-libraries-svr4 true". > > Isn't that the default? The re

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

On 14/05/2020 03:50, Emre Kultursay via lldb-dev wrote: > One thing I want to try is "settings set > plugin.process.gdb-remote.use-libraries-svr4 true". Isn't that the default? The reason this setting was added was so we could test the !svr code path without forcibly disab

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45921] New: lldb not directly stopped at a specified statement

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45921 Bug ID: 45921 Summary: lldb not directly stopped at a specified statement Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45920] New: lldb wrongly stopped at a statement for nesting loop using step instruction

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45920 Bug ID: 45920 Summary: lldb wrongly stopped at a statement for nesting loop using step instruction Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

; > Greg > > On May 8, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Emre Kultursay via lldb-dev < > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi lldb-dev, > > *TL;DR: *Has there been any efforts to introduce something like "Just My > Code" debugging on LLDB? Debugging on Android would really bene

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

One reason to not only load your libraries is backtraces will be truncated for any stack frames that go through the system libraries. These tend to be in the stack traces a lot as we deal with Android all the time at Facebook... Greg > On May 8, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Emre Kultursay via lldb-

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

f the cost is in parsing these libraries, we can look at parallelizing the > loading of all the device shared libraries first (prior to debugging) and > then launching when everything is pre-loaded. > > Greg > > >> On May 8, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Emre Kultursay via lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

ook at parallelizing the loading of all the device shared libraries first (prior to debugging) and then launching when everything is pre-loaded. Greg > On May 8, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Emre Kultursay via lldb-dev > wrote: > > Hi lldb-dev, > > TL;DR: Has there been any efforts to

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45905] [lldb][unittest] Assertion failed : (m_replayers.find(RunID) == m_replayers.end())

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45905 Jonas Devlieghere changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org |jdevliegh...@apple.com -- You are

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45905] New: [lldb][unittest] Assertion failed : (m_replayers.find(RunID) == m_replayers.end())

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45905 Bug ID: 45905 Summary: [lldb][unittest] Assertion failed : (m_replayers.find(RunID) == m_replayers.end()) Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45902] New: Wrong Debug Information at O3

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45902 Bug ID: 45902 Summary: Wrong Debug Information at O3 Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45894] New: LLDB LoadImageUsingPaths fails on 32bit arm linux platform

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45894 Bug ID: 45894 Summary: LLDB LoadImageUsingPaths fails on 32bit arm linux platform Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 41706] LLDB is broken on arm-linux-gnu-eabihf

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41706 Omair Javaid changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45893] New: Assert StackFrame Recognizer fails on arm-linux 32bit

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45893 Bug ID: 45893 Summary: Assert StackFrame Recognizer fails on arm-linux 32bit Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45892] New: LLDB fails to calculate backtrace from libc functions on arm

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45892 Bug ID: 45892 Summary: LLDB fails to calculate backtrace from libc functions on arm Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status:

Re: [lldb-dev] LLDB_PYTHON_HOME

of using FindPython3 are worth bumping the minimum required CMake >>>> version (see lldb/CMakeLists.txt, line 2-4). Once LLVM moves to CMake 3.12 >>>> or later, all these problems should be fixed. We can then call FindPython3 >>>> once and rely on everything being

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45886] New: Wrong variable value change during debugging at Og

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45886 Bug ID: 45886 Summary: Wrong variable value change during debugging at Og Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity:

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45883] Wrong Back Trace Information at O3

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45883 Jeremy Morse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jdevliegh...@apple.com, |

Re: [lldb-dev] LLDB_PYTHON_HOME

vlieghere.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey Adrian, >>>>> >>>>> Config.h gets generated by expanding the corresponding CMake >>>>> variables. If you look at LLDBConfig.cmake, you can see that >>>>> LLDB_PYTHON

Re: [lldb-dev] Is there a just-my-code like debugging mode for LLDB?

Ingham via lldb-dev wrote: > Note, if you are reading the binaries out of memory from the device, and > don’t have local symbols, things go much more slowly.  gdb-remote is NOT > a high bandwidth protocol, and fetching all the symbols through a series > of memory reads is pretty

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45869] New: ELF debug sections relocation not implemented for 32bit targets

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45869 Bug ID: 45869 Summary: ELF debug sections relocation not implemented for 32bit targets Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24737] CreateDuringInstructionStep is flaky on arm

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24737 Omair Javaid changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |WORKSFORME -- You are receiving this mail

[lldb-dev] [Bug 27868] Evaluating JITed expressions on arm cannot handle hard float ABI

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27868 Omair Javaid changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24737] CreateDuringInstructionStep is flaky on arm

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24737 Omair Javaid changed: What|Removed |Added CC||omair.jav...@linaro.org Status|NEW

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24739] single_step_only_steps_one_instruction tests are broken on arm and aarch64

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24739 Omair Javaid changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[lldb-dev] [Bug 45856] New: UTF8 data printed differently before and after program start

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45856 Bug ID: 45856 Summary: UTF8 data printed differently before and after program start Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All Status:

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >