[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D88769: [trace] Scaffold "thread trace dump instructions"
Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Oct 6 06:01:01 PDT 2020
labath added a comment.
In D88769#2312482 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D88769#2312482>, @wallace wrote:
> - Comments on the architecture of classes are in that diff
Where would that be? I couldn't find anything that would answer my question from the previous comment?
The reason I want to know that is that if each `TraceXXX` "plugin" is supposed to have/use/need a `ProcessTraceXXX` plugin, then I'd rather organize them such that they are closer together. OTOH, if ProcessTrace is supposed to work with all kinds of traces, then the current design makes perfect sense (though I am having trouble imagining how would that work).
> - I was able to get rid of cross-plug-in dependencies except for RegisterContextHistory. The class is very simple, so I could move it to lldb/Core. What do you think?
IIUC, the only place which uses it the PT trace plugin. That is ok. Some plugin-to-plugin dependencies (though not cycles, ideally) are fine, particularly for something called "utility". That said, I don't think that moving this class to the core libraries would be a particularly bad choice either...
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D88769/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D88769
More information about the lldb-commits
mailing list