| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
As discussed on lldb-dev, this patch moves some LLDB tests into a hierarchy that more closely
resembles the commands we use in the LLDB interpreter. This patch should only move tests
that use the command interpreter and shouldn't touch any tests that primarily test the SB API.
Reviewers: #lldb, jfb, JDevlieghere
Reviewed By: #lldb, JDevlieghere
Subscribers: dexonsmith, arphaman, JDevlieghere, lldb-commits
Tags: #lldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67033
llvm-svn: 370605
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
we don't use a thumb code section.
Don't run Test128BitsInteger.py on armv7k; it's not a supported
type on that target.
llvm-svn: 351490
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This is a set of tests that were all marked as failing becuse of several different bugs. A couple of the bugs are now resolved as fixed since all the tests that were failing associated with the bug are now passing. It is possible that some of them are false positives, but there's a large number of unexpectedly passing tests on Windows, so I am doing a bulk un-xfail to get the buildbot to green.
llvm-svn: 349713
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: This test is failing on Windows because lldb does not support JIT on Windows.
Reviewers: davide, asmith
Reviewed By: davide
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53226
llvm-svn: 344543
|
|
|
They're not that common, and falling back is definitely
better than throwing an error instead of the result. If we
feel motivated, we might end up implementing support for these,
but it's unclear whether it's worth the effort/complexity.
Fixes PR38925.
<rdar://problem/44436068>
llvm-svn: 342262
|
