[lldb-dev] Inquiry about LLDB remote protocol

Aidan Dodds via lldb-dev lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Mar 29 08:20:48 PDT 2016

The GDB RSP, which LLDB RSP is derived from is certainly state-full and 
maintains an notion of the current thread for queries (reading 
registers, etc..) and for execution commands (stepping), see the 'H' packet.
The RSP has evolved quite a bit however and extended packets were 
introduced that do take TID's as a parameter (vcont for instance).
Hopefully someone can chip in who is more familiar with lldb-server however.

As for your other question, the RSP should however be relatively 
platform independent as far as state-fullness goes, I don't think and of 
the upstream lldb platforms keep an kind of special state.

Disclaimer... Its been a little while since I have had to really dig 
into RSP so its all liable to have changed.

On 29/03/2016 10:57, Ravitheja Addepally via lldb-dev wrote:
> Hello,
>       I wanted to know if the remote protocol of LLDB is state less or 
> not ? When i say state I am referring to if LLDB remembers the current 
> process or thread being debugged (which would mean we dont need to 
> specify that in the client to server packets ) . I was looking at the 
> GDBRemoteCommunicationServerLLGS and found that most of the packets 
> did not have the pid or thread id being passed to the server , so is 
> it safe to assume that the protocol is statefull ? is this assumption 
> also valid for all OS's ?
> ---Ravi
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20160329/48e4969e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the lldb-dev mailing list