On 05/03/2019 22:52, Zachary Turner wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:47 PM Jonas Devlieghere via lldb-dev <lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:I don't know much about the minidump format or code, but it sounds reasonable for me to have support for it in yaml2obj, which would be a sufficient motivation to have the code live there. As you mention in your footnote, MachO core files are already supported, and it sounds like ELF could reuse a bunch of existing code as well. So having everything in LLVM would give you even more symmetry. I also doubt anyone would mind having more fine grained yamlization, even if you cannot use it to reduce a test it's nicer to see structure than a binary blob (imho). Anyway, that's just my take, I guess this is more of a question for the LLVM mailing list.A lot of obj2yaml output is just "Section Name" / "Section Contents" and then a long hex string consisting of the contents. Since a core file is an ELF file, this would already be supported for obj2yaml today (in theory)
Actually, even this is not true. An elf *core file* is an *elf file*, but it contains no sections. It contains "segments" instead. :P obj2yaml has absolutely no support for segments so if you try it to yamlize a core file, you will get an empty output.
Interestingly, yaml2obj does contain some support for segments, but its extremely limited, and can only be used to create very simple "executable" files. Core files still cannot be represented there right now, as yaml2obj is still very section-centric.
However, I do see the appeal in having a single tool for yamlization of various "object" file formats, so I am going to send an email to llvm-dev and see what the response is like there. I'd encourage anyone interested in this to voice your opinion there too.
regards, pavel _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
