[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D30520: Make LLDB skip server-client roundtrip for signals that don't require any actions

[Eugene Zemtsov via lldb-commits]

UnixSignals::NeedsUpdating() method suggests that there is always at most
one observer of changes in UnixSignals, the guys who clear the flag. Even
though it might be the case now, it still feels like a bomb waiting to
explode when another observer starts calling UnixSignals::ResetNeedsUpdating().
I wouldn't want to introduce this limitation unless I absolutely have to.

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Jim Ingham <jingham at apple.com> wrote:

> I like it in the base class and Greg was okay with that too.  So let's
> leave that where it is.
>
> The only bit of this behavior that could be moved into UnixSignals as it
> seemed to me was the handling of "needs updating".  I was mostly proposing
> that because then you can already pass the UnixSignals into the
> communication client to test that the signals get suppressed, so if the
> "needs updating" was in UnixSignals you could test this part in the same
> way.
>
> So I'm not pushing hard on this change.
>
> Jim
>
>
> > On Mar 6, 2017, at 5:09 PM, Eugene Zemtsov via Phabricator <
> reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > eugene added a comment.
> >
> > UnixSignals is a nice self contained class that already does 99% of the
> work (see UnixSignals::GetFilteredSignals). I don't think we should have
> it call anybody.
> > Only process knows when it is the right time to send actual QPassSignals
> packet, there is not need to somehow push this knowledge into UnixSignals.
> >
> > Let's just decide if UpdateAutomaticSignalFiltering() is specific
> enough to live in GDBProcess or it's generic enough to live in the base
> process. I'm fine either way.
> >
> >
> > https://reviews.llvm.org/D30520
> >
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Eugene Zemtsov.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20170306/06cdb550/attachment.html>