[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D114675: [lldb] [Target] Support fallback to file address in ReadMemory()

[Jim Ingham via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

jingham added a comment.

Is this the proposal: If you are talking to a live process (including a Core File process) and the plugin you are using says it knows nothing about 0x1234, then as a fallback you ask some file if it has that address?  Why do you need to do this?  Are you guessing that the core file is just busted, and there should have been records in it for some loaded section but they were left out, and so you are guessing that they are going to be in the same place as if that section loaded rigidly in its place in the original file (not necessarily true)?

Once you have a process, the process is the truth of the memory layout.  Unless there's a real reason why the process lied to you about what was in the binary, I don't think we should be making up other data sources.  And it also seems like you would have to understand WHY this particular plugin was lying to you to know how to actually recover that memory correctly.

This doesn't seem like a good idea to me, and also seems like it's covering some other bug.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D114675/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D114675