[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D22352: Implement GetMemoryRegions() for Windows Minidumps and live processes.

[Adrian McCarthy via lldb-commits]

amccarth accepted this revision.
amccarth added a reviewer: amccarth.
amccarth added a comment.

LGTM.  Thanks!


================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/Windows/MiniDump/ProcessWinMiniDump.cpp:338
@@ -315,4 +337,3 @@
     // truncated.
-    error.SetErrorString("address is not in a known range");
     return error;
 }
----------------
hhellyer wrote:
> amccarth wrote:
> > hhellyer wrote:
> > > Asking for an address outside a known range is not actually an error, you just get back an unmapped range that specifies how far it is to the next mapped range.
> > > The original discussion about that happened here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D21751 - GetMemoryRegionInfo should only need to return an error if it is unimplemented. (I should probably have referenced that in the summary.)
> > Got it.  Thanks for the explanation!
> > 
> > Given that, should the condition on 284 ("the mini dump contains no memory range information") actually return an error or just an unmapped range?
> I thought the most likely cause of having no memory info would be not passing the MiniDumpWithFullMemoryInfo flag to MiniDumpWriteDump will create a dump without the MemoryInfoListStream present. Saying that memory range information from a dump like that is "unsupported" seemed like the right option. I think MiniDumpWithFullMemoryInfo is part of the default set of flags used when you create a dump through task manager so most dumps should have the stream.
> 
> I won't land the patch immediately, I'm happy to change it if you'd prefer it to return an unmapped range. I think it would have to be one unmapped range that ran from load_addr to LLDB_INVALID_ADDRESS to match the expected behaviour.
Sounds like you've thought it through more thoroughly than I, and I agree with your conclusions, so I have no objections.  Thanks for the explanations.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D22352