<div dir="ltr">Hi Todd,<div><br></div><div>I am using a clang-3.5 build release LLDB to debug an other clang-3.5 build debug LLDB on Linux x86_64 and it works pretty well for me (works better then using GDB). The most issue I am hitting is around expression evaluation when I can't execute very small functions in std:: objects, but I can get around it with accessing the internal data representation (primarily for shared_ptr, unique_ptr and vector). We are still using gcc for compiling lldb-server for android because the android clang have some issues (atomic not supported) but I don't know anybody who testing a gcc built LLDB on Linux.</div><div><br></div><div></div><div dir="ltr"><div>Tamas</div></div><div dir="ltr"><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:31 PM Pavel Labath via lldb-dev <<a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">There is no separate option, it should just work. :)<br>
<br>
I'm betting you are still missing some package there (we should<br>
document the prerequisites better). Could you send the error message<br>
you are getting so we can have a look.<br>
<br>
cheers,<br>
pl<br>
<br>
<br>
On 25 August 2015 at 16:20, Todd Fiala via lldb-dev<br>
<<a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Todd Fiala <<a href="mailto:todd.fiala@gmail.com" target="_blank">todd.fiala@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Chaoren Lin <<a href="mailto:chaorenl@google.com" target="_blank">chaorenl@google.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> The TestDataFormatterLibcc* tests require libc++-dev:<br>
>>><br>
>>> $ sudo apt-get install libc++-dev<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>> Ah okay, so we are working with libc++ on Ubuntu, that's good to hear.<br>
>> Pre-14.04 I gave up on it.<br>
>><br>
>> Will cmake automatically choose libc++ if it is present? Or do I need to<br>
>> pass something to cmake to use libc++?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Hmm it appears I need to do more than just install libc++-dev. I did a<br>
> clean build with that installed, then ran the tests, and I still have the<br>
> Libcxc/Libcxx tests failing. Is there some flag expected, either to pass<br>
> along for the compile options to dotest.py to override/specify which c++ lib<br>
> it is using?<br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Thanks, Chaoren!<br>
>><br>
>> -Todd<br>
>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Todd Fiala via lldb-dev<br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Zachary Turner <<a href="mailto:zturner@google.com" target="_blank">zturner@google.com</a>><br>
>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Can't comment on the failures for Linux, but I don't think we have a<br>
>>>>> good handle on the unexpected successes. I only added that information to<br>
>>>>> the output about a week ago, before that unexpected successes were actually<br>
>>>>> going unnoticed.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Okay, thanks Zachary. A while back we had some flapping tests that<br>
>>>> would oscillate between unexpected success and failure on Linux. Some of<br>
>>>> those might still be in that state but maybe (!) are fixed.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Anyone on the Linux end who happens to know if the fails in particular<br>
>>>> look normal, that'd be good to know.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Thanks!<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> It's likely that someone could just go in there and remove the XFAIL<br>
>>>>> from those tests.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:37 PM Todd Fiala via lldb-dev<br>
>>>>> <<a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Hi all,<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> I'm just trying to get a handle on current lldb test failures across<br>
>>>>>> different platforms.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> On Linux on non-virtualized hardware, I currently see the failures<br>
>>>>>> below on Ubuntu 14.04.2 using a setup like this:<br>
>>>>>> * stock linker (ld.bfd),<br>
>>>>>> * g++ 4.9.2<br>
>>>>>> * cmake<br>
>>>>>> * ninja<br>
>>>>>> * libstdc++<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> ninja check-lldb output:<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Ran 394 test suites (15 failed) (3.807107%)<br>
>>>>>> Ran 474 test cases (17 failed) (3.586498%)<br>
>>>>>> Failing Tests (15)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestCPPThis.py (Linux rad 3.13.0-57-generic<br>
>>>>>> #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccIterator.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMap.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMultiMap.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxMultiSet.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxSet.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxString.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterSkipSummary.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterUnordered.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShowPrint.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestRegisterVariables.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStaticVariables.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepNoDebug.py (Linux rad 3.13.0-57-generic<br>
>>>>>> #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestTypedefArray.py (Linux rad 3.13.0-57-generic<br>
>>>>>> #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestVectorTypesFormatting.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Unexpected Successes (10)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestBatchMode.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestEvents.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestExitDuringStep.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestFdLeak.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestInferiorAssert.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShow.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiInterpreterExec.py (Linux<br>
>>>>>> rad 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiSyntax.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestRaise.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestStubSetSID.py (Linux rad<br>
>>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> On a similar setup, although bumped up to Ubuntu 14.04.3 and now on a<br>
>>>>>> VMWare VM, everything else the same, I see a similar report from 'ninja<br>
>>>>>> check-lldb':<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Ran 394 test suites (17 failed) (4.314721%)<br>
>>>>>> Ran 474 test cases (19 failed) (4.008439%)<br>
>>>>>> Failing Tests (17)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestAttachResume.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestCPPThis.py (Linux lldb 3.19.0-26-generic<br>
>>>>>> #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccIterator.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMap.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMultiMap.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxMultiSet.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxSet.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxString.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterSkipSummary.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterUnordered.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShowPrint.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestRegisterVariables.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStaticVariables.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepNoDebug.py (Linux lldb 3.19.0-26-generic<br>
>>>>>> #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepOverWatchpoint.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestTypedefArray.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestVectorTypesFormatting.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Unexpected Successes (11)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestBatchMode.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestEvents.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestExitDuringStep.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestFdLeak.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestInferiorAssert.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShow.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiInterpreterExec.py (Linux<br>
>>>>>> lldb 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015<br>
>>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiSyntax.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestRaise.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestStubSetSID.py (Linux lldb<br>
>>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64<br>
>>>>>> x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestWatchedVarHitWhenInScope.py<br>
>>>>>> (Linux lldb 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC<br>
>>>>>> 2015 x86_64 x86_64)<br>
>>>>>> ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Do these more or less match the current state of affairs for Linux<br>
>>>>>> tests? If not, are there any suggestions on best practices for upgrades? A<br>
>>>>>> while back I had tried things like clang and libc++ but I had arrived at the<br>
>>>>>> above setup (albeit typically with the gold linker) simply due to what<br>
>>>>>> worked, what was easy to debug and what built fast.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Thanks for any confirmation on that!<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> --<br>
>>>>>> -Todd<br>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>>>> lldb-dev mailing list<br>
>>>>>> <a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>>>>>> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> --<br>
>>>> -Todd<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> lldb-dev mailing list<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> -Todd<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> -Todd<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> lldb-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
lldb-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div></div>