[lldb] Avoid Function::GetAddressRange in ThreadPlanStepRange::InSymbol #128515
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The existing implementation would probably produce false positives for discontinuous functions. I haven't tried reproducing it because setting up discontinuous functions (and executing them, in particular) is pretty complex and there's nothing particularly interesting happening here.
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb Author: Pavel Labath (labath) ChangesThe existing implementation would probably produce false positives for discontinuous functions. I haven't tried reproducing it because setting up discontinuous functions (and executing them, in particular) is pretty complex and there's nothing particularly interesting happening here. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128515.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/lldb/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp b/lldb/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp
index de4cd5995f695..78e1270edcdab 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp
@@ -197,9 +197,11 @@ bool ThreadPlanStepRange::InRange() {
bool ThreadPlanStepRange::InSymbol() {
lldb::addr_t cur_pc = GetThread().GetRegisterContext()->GetPC();
if (m_addr_context.function != nullptr) {
- return m_addr_context.function->GetAddressRange().ContainsLoadAddress(
- cur_pc, &GetTarget());
- } else if (m_addr_context.symbol && m_addr_context.symbol->ValueIsAddress()) {
+ AddressRange unused_range;
+ return m_addr_context.function->GetRangeContainingLoadAddress(
+ cur_pc, GetTarget(), unused_range);
+ }
+ if (m_addr_context.symbol && m_addr_context.symbol->ValueIsAddress()) {
AddressRange range(m_addr_context.symbol->GetAddressRef(),
m_addr_context.symbol->GetByteSize());
return range.ContainsLoadAddress(cur_pc, &GetTarget());
|
JDevlieghere
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2025
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/18/builds/11957 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The existing implementation would probably produce false positives for discontinuous functions. I haven't tried reproducing it because setting up discontinuous functions (and executing them, in particular) is pretty complex and there's nothing particularly interesting happening here.