labath added inline comments.

================
Comment at: 
source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationClient.cpp:3579
@@ +3578,3 @@
+        */
+        if (!response.IsNormalResponse() && thread_ids.size() == 0 && 
IsConnected())
+        {
----------------
jaydeep wrote:
> labath wrote:
> > labath wrote:
> > > The problem behind the failures seems to be this: when we connect to the 
> > > remote lldb-server, it should not have any processes or threads running 
> > > (we will start those with the A packet later). We verify this in 
> > > ProcessGDBRemote.cpp:837. This translates to a qfThreadInfo packet, to 
> > > which our stub responds with OK.
> > > 
> > > This sounds like a bug in the stub, as the protocol does not mention that 
> > > as a possibility. I will prepare a patch for that shortly. Could you 
> > > please wait with this patch a bit until the bugfix lands?
> > > 
> > > Also, this got me thinking.. What is the response of your stub to the 
> > > qfThreadInfo packet. If it is something like '?', then we could check for 
> > > `response.IsUnsupportedResponse()` and we will avoid an overly broad 
> > > check for your corner case. What do you think?
> > > The problem behind the failures seems to be this: when we connect to the 
> > > remote lldb-server, it should not have any processes or threads running 
> > > (we will start those with the A packet later). We verify this in 
> > > ProcessGDBRemote.cpp:837. This translates to a qfThreadInfo packet, to 
> > > which our stub responds with OK.
> > 
> > Hmm.. the debugserver seems to have this behavior as well. Greg, what do 
> > you think should be the right response to this packet when we have no 
> > process running? My feeling is that we should just send a "l" packet as if 
> > we have just reached the end of the list. What do you think?
> Response from the target is "$#00". I think we should check for 
> IsUnsupportedResponse().
> 
If IsUnsupportedResponse will do the trick for you then I have no objections, 
and this can go in straight away.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

http://reviews.llvm.org/D12876



_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to