[lldb-dev] [Bug 24831] New: cmake + ninja: 'ninja lldb' misses lib/python2.7 build dependency on Linux

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24831 Bug ID: 24831 Summary: cmake + ninja: 'ninja lldb' misses lib/python2.7 build dependency on Linux Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All

Re: [lldb-dev] Testing through api vs. commands

I agree that we should test the command interface, but a) they should be explicitly marked as interface tests. b) There should be MUCH fewer. c) It should only verify that typing a particular command maps to the right core sequence of public / private API calls. Not that the debugger

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24833] New: cmake + ninja: 'ninja lldb' misses lldb-server dependency on Linux

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24833 Bug ID: 24833 Summary: cmake + ninja: 'ninja lldb' misses lldb-server dependency on Linux Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All

Re: [lldb-dev] Testing through api vs. commands

> On Sep 15, 2015, at 4:23 PM, d...@burble.org wrote: > > I do still think we need some tests that verify commands run, but I think > those tests should focus not on doing complicated interactions with the > debugger, and instead just verifying that things parse correctly and the

Re: [lldb-dev] 7th build slot?

Okay, thanks. It would be awesome if the summary listed the specific versions of clang being used. TOT is obvious, but "clang" being 3.5 is less so. Seeing as clang behavior can change between releases, perhaps we can use the other slots for other clang versions? TOT clearly makes sense if

Re: [lldb-dev] 7th build slot?

Thanks for the info, Ying! On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Ying Chen wrote: > Thanks for the suggestions. > I've changed the descriptions of "clang" to "clang-3.5" since this > > build. > > We

Re: [lldb-dev] Digging into Linux unexpected successes

Change http://reviews.llvm.org/D12831 in review (waiting on Windows results for that) adds a test event stream that supports pluggable test event formatters. The first formatter I've added is JUnit/XUnit output. That's to support typical JUnit/XUnit output handling built into most commercial and

Re: [lldb-dev] Digging into Linux unexpected successes

Hi Todd, I attached the statistic of the last 100 test run on the Linux x86_64 builder (http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake). The data might be a little bit noisy because of the actual test failures happening because of a temporary regression, but they should give you

Re: [lldb-dev] Digging into Linux unexpected successes

Wow Tamas, this is perfect. Thanks for pulling that together! Don't worry about the bigger file. Thanks much. -Todd On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Tamas Berghammer wrote: > I created a new statistic what separates the data based on compiler and > architecture and I

Re: [lldb-dev] Digging into Linux unexpected successes

Unfortunately the GCE logs aren't public at the moment and the amount of them isn't make it easy to make them accessible in any way (~30MB/build) and they aren't much more machine parsable then the stdout from the build. I think downloading data with the json API won't help because it will only

Re: [lldb-dev] 7th build slot?

Thanks for the suggestions. I've changed the descriptions of "clang" to "clang-3.5" since this build. We currently have 8 test slots reserved. 1-6 are configurations that should pass, 7-8 are experimental ones that

Re: [lldb-dev] Digging into Linux unexpected successes

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Tamas Berghammer wrote: > I think downloading data with the json API won't help because it will only > list the failures displayed on the Web UI what don't contain full test > names and don't contain info about the UnexpectedSuccess-es. If

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24827] New: test events: add test backtraces for fail/xfail

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24827 Bug ID: 24827 Summary: test events: add test backtraces for fail/xfail Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24828] New: test events: add "announce all tests that will run"

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24828 Bug ID: 24828 Summary: test events: add "announce all tests that will run" Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24829] test events: emit flakey pass/fail as unique from normal pass or xfail

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24829 Todd Fiala changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org |todd.fi...@gmail.com --

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24829] New: test events: emit flakey pass/fail as unique from normal pass or xfail

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24829 Bug ID: 24829 Summary: test events: emit flakey pass/fail as unique from normal pass or xfail Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24830] parallel test runner drops signal-based inferior exit statuses on the floor

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24830 Todd Fiala changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org |todd.fi...@gmail.com --

[lldb-dev] [Bug 24830] New: parallel test runner drops signal-based inferior exit statuses on the floor

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24830 Bug ID: 24830 Summary: parallel test runner drops signal-based inferior exit statuses on the floor Product: lldb Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All

Re: [lldb-dev] e not working when debugging llvm pass

Hi Greg, Thanks for your response. -fstandalone-debug what was I needed. The rest of this email is just FYI: Originally the command: (lldb) image lookup -t llvm::BasicBlock Just output a blank line. I was using a self compiled version of lldb (release_37) so it seems your #2 was my case.

[lldb-dev] Get vtable info from the image

Hi, I believe there's now a: (gdb) info vtbl ... and I'm unable to find the equivalent of this in lldb. I usually do: (lldb) im look -r -v -s ... and look for the vtable info in the output, but it doesn't always seem to be there. What am I missing? Thanks. Ram

Re: [lldb-dev] Get vtable info from the image

Ha, turns out it's (lldb) im look -r -v -s "vtable for ..." We should document this in http://lldb.llvm.org/lldb-gdb.html On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > Hi, > > I believe there's now a: > > (gdb) info vtbl ... > > and I'm unable to find

Re: [lldb-dev] Digging into Linux unexpected successes

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Tamas Berghammer wrote: > Hi Todd, > > I attached the statistic of the last 100 test run on the Linux x86_64 > builder (http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake). > The data might be a little bit noisy because of