ail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 6:24 AM
>> To: Ted Woodward
>> Cc: Greg Clayton ; lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
>> Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs
>> lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface
>>
>> If I may ask, among the options
ember of Code Aurora Forum,
> > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: lldb-dev [mailto:lldb-dev-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of
> >> Greg Clayton via lldb-dev
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 21,
lldb-dev [mailto:lldb-dev-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Greg
>> Clayton via lldb-dev
>> Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 10:10 AM
>> To: Ramana
>> Cc: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
>> Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs
>> lldb_private::Regis
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Greg Clayton wrote:
>
>> On Sep 21, 2017, at 5:15 AM, Ramana wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, I could not respond yesterday as I was of out of office.
>>
>>> Interesting. There are two ways to accomplish this:
>>> 1 - Treat the CPU as one target and the GPU as another.
>>> 2 -
t; Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 10:10 AM
> To: Ramana
> Cc: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs
> lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface
>
>
> > On Sep 21, 2017, at 5:15 AM, Ramana
> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry,
> On Sep 21, 2017, at 5:15 AM, Ramana wrote:
>
> Sorry, I could not respond yesterday as I was of out of office.
>
>> Interesting. There are two ways to accomplish this:
>> 1 - Treat the CPU as one target and the GPU as another.
>> 2 - Treat the CPU and GPU as one target
>>
>> The tricky thing
Sorry, I could not respond yesterday as I was of out of office.
> Interesting. There are two ways to accomplish this:
> 1 - Treat the CPU as one target and the GPU as another.
> 2 - Treat the CPU and GPU as one target
>
> The tricky things with solution #1 is how to manage switching the targets
>
> On Sep 19, 2017, at 3:32 AM, Ramana wrote:
>
> Thank you so much Greg for your comments.
>
>> What architecture and os are you looking to support?
>
> The OS is Linux and the primary use scenario is remote debugging.
> Basically http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/2017-June/012445.html
Thank you so much Greg for your comments.
> What architecture and os are you looking to support?
The OS is Linux and the primary use scenario is remote debugging.
Basically http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/2017-June/012445.html
is what I am trying to achieve and unfortunately that query d
orum, a
> Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: lldb-dev [mailto:lldb-dev-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Greg
>> Clayton via lldb-dev
>> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 10:16 AM
>> To: Ramana
>> Cc: lldb-dev@li
vm.org] On Behalf Of Greg
> Clayton via lldb-dev
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 10:16 AM
> To: Ramana
> Cc: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs
> lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface
>
> When supporting a new architecture, ou
When supporting a new architecture, our preferred route is to modify
lldb-server (a GDB server binary that supports native debugging) to support
your architecture. Why? Because this gets you remote debugging for free. If you
go this route, then you will subclass a lldb_private::NativeRegisterCon
Thank you Greg for the detailed response.
Can you please also shed some light on the NativeRegisterContext. When
do we need to subclass NativeRegisterContext and (how) are they
related to RegisterContext_?
It appears that not all architectures having
RegisterContext_ have sub classed NativeRegiste
na
>
> -Original Message-
> From: lldb-dev [mailto:lldb-dev-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Ramana
> via lldb-dev
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 September, 2017 9:00 AM
> To: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
> Subject: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs
> lldb_private:
Seems like this class was added for testing. RegisterInfoInterface is a class
that creates a common API for getting lldb_private::RegisterInfo structures.
A RegisterContext_ class uses one of these to be able to create a
buffer large enough to store all registers defined in the RegisterInfoInt
Wednesday, 13 September, 2017 9:00 AM
To: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
Subject: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs
lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface
Hi,
When deriving RegisterContext_, why some platforms (Arch+OS) are
deriving it from lldb_private::RegisterContext while others are der
Hi,
When deriving RegisterContext_, why some platforms (Arch+OS)
are deriving it from lldb_private::RegisterContext while others are
deriving from lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface or in other words
how to decide on the base class to derive from between those two and
what are the implications?
17 matches
Mail list logo
