Looks like I don't completely understand what is the difference between user-mode and kernel-mode from the debugger's point of view. Could you please explain me this?
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:22 PM Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: > I don’t totally agree with this. I think there are a lot of useful os > awareness tasks in user mode. For example, you’re debugging a deadlock and > want to understand the state of other mutexes, who owns them, etc. or you > want to examine open file descriptors. In the case of a heap corruption you > may wish to study the internal structures of your process’s heap, or even > lower level, the os virtual memory page table structures. > > There’s quite a lot you can still do in user mode, but definitely there is > more in kernel mode. As Leonard said, try put WinDbg as a lot of this stuff > already exists so it’s a good reference > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 12:08 PM Alexander Polyakov via lldb-dev < > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi Leonard, >> >> I think it will be kernel-mode debugging since debugging an application >> in user mode is not an OS awareness imo. Of course, some of kernel's >> modules might run in user-mode, but it will be ok I think. >> >> Thanks for your reference, I'll take a look at it. >> >> Also, I found out that ARM supports OS awareness in their DS-5 debugger. >> They have a mechanism for adding new operating systems. All you need to do >> is to describe OS' model (thread's or task's structure for example). I >> think that is how it might be done in LLDB. >> >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:26 PM Leonard Mosescu <mose...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Alexander, are you interested in user-mode, kernel-mode debugging or >>> both? >>> >>> Fore reference, the current state of the art regarding OS-awareness >>> debugging is debugging tools for windows >>> <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/debugger/index> >>> (windbg >>> & co.). This is not surprising since the tools were developed alongside >>> Windows. Obviously they are specific to Windows, but it's good example of >>> how the OS-awareness might look like. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Alexander Polyakov via lldb-dev < >>> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi lldb-dev, >>>> >>>> I'm a senior student at Saint Petersburg State University. The one of >>>> my possible diploma themes is "OS Awareness in LLDB". Generally, the OS >>>> awareness extends a debugger to provide a representation of the OS threads >>>> - or tasks - and other relevant data structures, typically semaphores, >>>> mutexes, or queues. >>>> >>>> I want to ask the community if OS awareness is interesting for LLDB >>>> users and developers? The main goal is to create some base on top of LLDB >>>> that can be extended to support awareness for different operating systems. >>>> >>>> Also, if you have a good article or other useful information about OS >>>> awareness, please share it with me. >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Alexander >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> lldb-dev mailing list >>>> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org >>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Alexander >> _______________________________________________ >> lldb-dev mailing list >> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev >> > -- Alexander
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
