[lldb] Fix ThreadPlanStepOut::DoPlanExplainsStop inspection of BreakpointSite

lldb/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepOut.cpp

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
 
 #include "lldb/Target/ThreadPlanStepOut.h"
 #include "lldb/Breakpoint/Breakpoint.h"
+#include "lldb/Breakpoint/BreakpointLocation.h"
 #include "lldb/Core/Value.h"
 #include "lldb/Symbol/Block.h"
 #include "lldb/Symbol/Function.h"
@@ -306,6 +307,21 @@ bool ThreadPlanStepOut::ValidatePlan(Stream *error) {
   return true;
 }
 
+/// Returns true if :
+/// 1. All breakpoints in this site are internal, and
+/// 2. All breakpoint locations in this site are NOT valid for `thread`.
+static bool NoUserBreakpointsHere(BreakpointSite &site, Thread &thread) {
+  for (unsigned bp_idx = 0; bp_idx < site.GetNumberOfConstituents(); bp_idx++) {
+    BreakpointLocation &bp_loc = *site.GetConstituentAtIndex(bp_idx);
+    const Breakpoint &bp = bp_loc.GetBreakpoint();
+    if (bp.IsInternal())
+      continue;
+    if (bp_loc.ValidForThisThread(thread))
+      return false;
+  }
+  return true;
+}
+
 bool ThreadPlanStepOut::DoPlanExplainsStop(Event *event_ptr) {
   // If the step out plan is done, then we just need to step through the
   // inlined frame.
@@ -356,13 +372,10 @@ bool ThreadPlanStepOut::DoPlanExplainsStop(Event *event_ptr) {
           }
         }
 
-        // If there was only one owner, then we're done.  But if we also hit
-        // some user breakpoint on our way out, we should mark ourselves as
-        // done, but also not claim to explain the stop, since it is more
-        // important to report the user breakpoint than the step out
-        // completion.
-
-        if (site_sp->GetNumberOfConstituents() == 1)
+        // If the thread also hit a user breakpoint on its way out, the plan is
+        // done but should not claim to explain the stop. It is more important
+        // to report the user breakpoint than the step out completion.
+        if (NoUserBreakpointsHere(*site_sp, GetThread()))
           return true;
       }
       return false;