[lldb] [llvm] [lldb] Support disassembling RISC-V proprietary instructions (PR #145793)

David Spickett via llvm-commits llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Jul 14 01:40:58 PDT 2025


================
@@ -90,3 +91,64 @@ TEST_F(TestMCDisasmInstanceRISCV, TestRISCV32Instruction) {
   EXPECT_FALSE(inst_sp->IsCall());
   EXPECT_TRUE(inst_sp->DoesBranch());
 }
+
+TEST_F(TestMCDisasmInstanceRISCV, TestOpcodeBytePrinter) {
+  ArchSpec arch("riscv32-*-linux");
+
+  const unsigned num_of_instructions = 7;
+  // clang-format off
+  uint8_t data[] = {
+      0x41, 0x11,             // addi   sp, sp, -0x10
+      0x06, 0xc6,             // sw     ra, 0xc(sp)
+      0x23, 0x2a, 0xa4, 0xfe, // sw     a0, -0xc(s0)
+      0x23, 0x28, 0xa4, 0xfe, // sw     a0, -0x10(s0)
+      0x22, 0x44,             // lw     s0, 0x8(sp)
+
+      0x3f, 0x00, 0x40, 0x09, // Fake 64-bit instruction
+      0x20, 0x00, 0x20, 0x00,
+
+      0x1f, 0x02,             // 48 bit xqci.e.li rd=8 imm=0x1000
+      0x00, 0x00, 
+      0x00, 0x10,
+  };
+  // clang-format on
+
+  // clang-format off
+  const char *expected_outputs[] = {
+    "1141",
+    "c606",
+    "fea42a23",
+    "fea42823",
+    "4422",
+    "0940003f 00200020",
+    "021f 0000 1000"
+  };
+  // clang-format on
+  const unsigned num_of_expected_outputs =
+      sizeof(expected_outputs) / sizeof(char *);
+
+  EXPECT_EQ(num_of_instructions, num_of_expected_outputs);
+
+  DisassemblerSP disass_sp;
+  Address start_addr(0x100);
+  disass_sp = Disassembler::DisassembleBytes(
+      arch, nullptr, nullptr, nullptr, nullptr, start_addr, &data, sizeof(data),
+      num_of_instructions, false);
+
+  // If we failed to get a disassembler, we can assume it is because
+  // the llvm we linked against was not built with the riscv target,
+  // and we should skip these tests without marking anything as failing.
+  if (!disass_sp)
+    return;
----------------
DavidSpickett wrote:

This predicate is already checked in the cmake file lldb/unittests/Disassembler/CMakeLists.txt.

Also if you could do a quick follow up to remove the check from the other test that would be good.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145793


More information about the llvm-commits mailing list