All DWZ patches are also applied in: git clone -b dwz git://git.jankratochvil.net/lldb
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rL LLVM
Event Timeline
Just move the eSectionTypeDWARFGNUDebugAltLink enumerator to the end of the enum and this is good to go.
include/lldb/lldb-enumerations.h | ||
---|---|---|
647 ↗ | (On Diff #124294) | Since this enumeration is in the public API, it should be added to the end of the enum. Anyone that builds a new liblldb.so and then uses it with an binary compiled before could run into issues. But I noticed eSectionTypeDWARFDebugCuIndex was added in the middle in August, but we need to avoid these kinds of API issues, so lets add this to the end just to be safe. |
It is now reworked without FileOffset and the remapping to unique DIE offsets for each DW_TAG_partial_unit inclusion by DW_TAG_imported_unit, as discussed in: https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/Week-of-Mon-20180409/040324.html
Could you add a "section type" line in the dumpModules in lldb-test.cpp. Then we can write a test for this. (not that this is a extremely dangerous change, but it seems a shame not to test it when it is so easy).
Thanks, that's great, but I don't see you using that functionality to test the debug-alt-link classification (I guess I wasn't clear about that, but that is the reason why I asked you to add it). Could you add a test with the new section as well?
Added lit/Modules/dwarf-gnu-debugaltlink.yaml. I do not see its test success anywhere but when I make it fail I see its failure in make check-lldb stdout/stderr. Curiously its simulated failure does not appear in make check-lit.
Awesome, thanks. I think we can get this one out of the way.
That's supposed to happen. To see passing tests you need to run lit in the verbose mode.
Curiously its simulated failure does not appear in make check-lit.
check-lit is a lit-selftest. This test should not be run as a part of that. Did you perhaps mean check-lldb-lit (which should probably be removed because it's now practically an alias for check-lldb)?
Thanks, I will check it in next days.
check-lit is a lit-selftest. This test should not be run as a part of that. Did you perhaps mean check-lldb-lit (which should probably be removed because it's now practically an alias for check-lldb)?
Yes, I was wrongly running check-lit instead of check-lldb-lit, thanks for the correction.