[lldb] Cherry-pick changes to generate swig bindings from API headers instead of interface files #6731
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
bulbazord
changed the title
|
@swift-ci please test |
Instead of maintaining separate swig interface files, we can use the API headers directly. They implement the exact same C++ APIs and we can conditionally include the python extensions as needed. To remove the swig extensions from the API headers when building the LLDB framework, we can use the unifdef tool when it is available. Otherwise we just copy them as-is. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926 (cherry picked from commit 662548c)
This patch improves breakpoint management when doing interactive scripted process debugging. In other to know which process set a breakpoint, we need to do some book keeping on the multiplexer scripted process. When initializing the multiplexer, we will first copy breakpoints that are already set on the driving target. Everytime we launch or resume, we should copy breakpoints from the multiplexer to the driving process. When creating a breakpoint from a child process, it needs to be set both on the multiplexer and on the driving process. We also tag the created breakpoint with the name and pid of the originator process. This patch also implements all the requirement to achieve proper breakpoint management. That involves: - Adding python interator for breakpoints and watchpoints in SBTarget - Add a new `ScriptedProcess.create_breakpoint` python method Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D148548 Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit e31d0c2)
This patch tries to address an interoperability issue when writing python string into the process memory. Since the python string is not null-terminated, it would still be written to memory however, when trying to read it again with `SBProcess::ReadCStringFromMemory`, the memory read would fail, since the read string doens't contain a null-terminator, and therefore is not a valid C string. To address that, this patch extends the `SBProcess` SWIG interface to expose a new `WriteMemoryAsCString` method that is only exposed to the SWIG target language. That method checks that the buffer to write is null-terminated and otherwise, it appends a null byte at the end of it. Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit e6cac17)
bulbazord
force-pushed
the
cherrypick-swig-changes-20221013
branch
from
dd36fbc to
4cf5aef
Compare
|
@swift-ci please test |
This patch adds the following methods: * `GetType()` * `GetWatchValueKind()` * `GetWatchSpec()` * `IsWatchingReads()` * `IsWatchingWrites()` These mostly expose methods that `lldb_private::Watchpoint` already had. Tests are included that exercise these new methods. The motivation for exposing these are as follows: * `GetType()` - With this information and the address from a watchpoint it is now possible to construct an SBValue from an SBWatchpoint. Previously this wasn't possible. The included test case illustrates doing this. * `GetWatchValueKind()` - This allows the caller to determine whether the watchpoint is a variable watchpoint or an expression watchpoint. A new enum (`WatchpointValueKind`) has been introduced to represent the return values. Unfortunately the name `WatchpointKind` was already taken. * `GetWatchSpec()` - This allows (at least for variable watchpoints) to use a sensible name for SBValues created from an SBWatchpoint. * `IsWatchingReads()` - This allow checking if a watchpoint is monitoring read accesses. * `IsWatchingWRites()` - This allow checking if a watchpoint is monitoring write accesses. rdar://105606978 Reviewers: jingham, mib, bulbazord, jasonmolenda, JDevlieghere Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144937 (cherry picked from commit 55a363f)
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
@swift-ci please test |
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.
No description provided.