[lldb-dev] Increasing support for other gdbservers

Colin Riley colin at codeplay.com
Tue Mar 31 14:06:43 PDT 2015

I noticed that use in cmake also. FWIW, my primary LLDB platform is 
Windows, which is why we were using TinyXML2 for ease of prototyping. If 
libxml2 works on all the targets we will use it - I do worry about the 
usual issues you get with windows prebuilts. So source may still be 
required. We'll look into it.


On 31/03/2015 20:45, Zachary Turner wrote:
> There's already some stuff in the CMake to try to find libxml, but 
> it's behind a Darwin specific branch in the CMake.  So I think what 
> would need to happen is that we move this into a platform agnostic 
> codepath, and then set a define like LLDB_HAVE_LIBXML2 in the code to 
> a value that indicates whether it is present (search clang 
> for CLANG_HAVE_LIBXML in *.* to see how this is done).  Then, in the 
> code, we would need to put xml code behind a check for this define.
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:02 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com 
> <mailto:zturner at google.com>> wrote:
>     A good rule of thumb for anything is that "Windows doesn't have
>     it" and that holds true for libxml2 as well.  It appears that
>     libxml2 does support Windows though
>     (http://xmlsoft.org/downloads.html), it just isn't something
>     that's there by default.  It would be nice if everyone were using
>     the same thing, could we clone this repo in our own repo and then
>     just build it ourselves as part of the build process.  The license
>     looks very permissive, but IANAL.
>     On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 9:47 AM Greg Clayton <gclayton at apple.com
>     <mailto:gclayton at apple.com>> wrote:
>         > On Mar 31, 2015, at 3:35 AM, Aidan Dodds <aidan at codeplay.com
>         <mailto:aidan at codeplay.com>> wrote:
>         >
>         > On 30/03/2015 18:38, Greg Clayton wrote:
>         > >
>         > > I know about the register numbering stuff and I would love
>         to see support for the "$qXfer:features:" added to LLDB. The
>         one thing this data doesn't contain is the register numbers
>         for the ABI (DWARF register numbers (for debug info), compiler
>         register numbers (for like .eh_frame)), but that info could be
>         inferred from an ABI plugin that we could infer from the
>         "osabi" of "GNU/Linux" in the target.xml:
>         >
>         > >
>         > > So please do submit patches that implement this and we
>         will be happy to approve them.
>         >
>         > I am currently prototyping $qXfer:features support in LLDB
>         with an aim to upstream it. It will require an XML parser, so
>         I wanted to have a discussion about adding one to LLDB.
>         Most unix variants have libxml2 that is available. I am not
>         sure on windows though. I have CC'ed Zachary to get some input
>         on windows XML (in case LLVM doesn't already have some support
>         for this).
>         > I have been using TinyXML2 in my prototype, which is open
>         sourced under the ZLib license. Is there any policy in LLDB
>         for handling external library dependencies?
>         > Would there be objections to TinyXML2 making its way into
>         the LLDB code base as an external? Writing a new XML parser
>         from scratch in LLDB isn't ideal.
>         It would be great to stick with stuff that everyone has
>         installed and hopefully that is libxml2. Windows is the
>         biggest question. I am also not sure if llvm or clang has any
>         XML support, but we should first look to see if llvm has XML
>         support and if not, then look for alternatives. We definitely
>         do not want to write our own.
>         >
>         > I would still like to have a discussion about adding a
>         plugin architecture to gdb-remote making it easier to handle
>         packets outwith the LLDB based servers. The code in gdb-remote
>         that sends and handles packets is scattered over one or two
>         huge classes, it would be beneficial to start looking at
>         breaking this up and modularizing it. At least for the packets
>         which are not supported by lldb's own RSP producers.
>         I say just build all and any support it into
>         GDBRemoteCommunicationClient and GDBRemoteCommunicationServer.
>         I don't see the need to break it up.
>         Greg Clayton
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20150331/d4a74e1a/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-dev mailing list