[PATCH] D56084: Resubmit of rL345008 "Split MachinePipeliner code into header and cpp files"

[Adrian Prantl via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

aprantl added a comment.

In D56084#1347564 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D56084#1347564>, @lsaba wrote:

> In D56084#1346142 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D56084#1346142>, @sgraenitz wrote:
>
> > @aprantl Found a workaround for the lldb-cmake bot: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL350346
> >
> > I tested it locally with your patch reapplied and the error is fixed. Sorry again for the hassle. Please submit your patch. Thanks
>
>
> @aprantl , @sgraenitz , I tried to resbumit the patch in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL350493 but unfortunately issues with the modules still appear: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x64-windows-ninja/builds/314/steps/test/logs/stdio
>
> it is now able to build but the  lit test  SymbolFile/PDB/class-layout.test is failing:
>
> $ ":" "RUN: at line 4"
>  $ "E:\build_slave\lldb-x64-windows-ninja\build\bin\lldb-test.EXE" "symbols" "E:\build_slave\lldb-x64-windows-ninja\build\tools\lldb\lit\SymbolFile\PDB\Output/ClassLayoutTest.cpp.exe"
>
> 1. command stderr: error: Module has no symbol vendor.
>
> error: command failed with exit status: 1
>  $ "E:\build_slave\lldb-x64-windows-ninja\build\bin\FileCheck.EXE" "E:\build_slave\lldb-x64-windows-ninja\llvm\tools\lldb\lit\SymbolFile\PDB\class-layout.test"
>
> 1. command stderr: E:\build_slave\lldb-x64-windows-ninja\llvm\tools\lldb\lit\SymbolFile\PDB\class-layout.test:15:8: error: CHECK: expected string not found in input CHECK: Module [[MOD:.*]] ^ <stdin>:1:1: note: scanning from here Module: E:\build_slave\lldb-x64-windows-ninja\build\tools\lldb\lit\SymbolFile\PDB\Output/ClassLayoutTest.cpp.exe
>
> I have reverted the patch again for now as I am unable to reproduce the issue locally, your help will be much apprecicated


Even though this error also has `Module` in the name, this is a completely unrelated issue. Unfortunately Module is a terribly overloaded term. Are you sure that this was actually caused by your commit? It sounds unlikely.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D56084/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D56084