[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb] Implement basic support for reverse-continue (PR #99736)

[via lldb-commits]

jimingham wrote:



> On Jul 29, 2024, at 1:06 PM, rocallahan ***@***.***> wrote:
> 
> 
> As it stands, this will allow "reverse continue to a breakpoint", right?
> 
> Using rr as the backend you can reverse-continue to any stop, including signals, watchpoints and the "history boundary" i.e. start of time. I expect the other stop types don't work well yet. I plan to work on them next. We can delay adding the CLI for reverse-continue until they work adequately.
> 
> But once "in the past" you wouldn't be able to do either forward or reverse steps, you are just going to navigate by breakpoint?
> 
> After reverse-continue you can do any kind of forward execution you want. With LLDB + rr, you're always "in the past" since during debugging rr always/only navigates history; when you're at a certain point in time the state of LLDB and rr is independent of whether you got there by forward or reverse execution. And LLDB + rr is pretty much fully functional already --- except for the absence of reverse-execution commands.
> 
Is there a notion of "reverse stepping" like "take me to the line that preceded this one in execution history", and if so what contains the logic that does that?

Jim


> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99736#issuecomment-2256799688>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADUPVW2BNU5A4UKC5T2AB6DZO2OETAVCNFSM6AAAAABLFTBQAKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDENJWG44TSNRYHA>.
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> 



https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99736