[lldb-dev] JIT debugging and Windows

[Andrew MacPherson]

Hi Keno,

I noticed the same thing and agree that the JIT loader doesn't perfectly
fit as a DynamicLoader, the suggestion from a couple of years back on the
list was to make the Process -> DynamicLoader relationship 1:n but I prefer
your suggestion of adding a new plugin type (JITLoader). Right now there
would only be one JITLoader type for the GDB interface.

The patch could probably be fixed up as-is as a first step (leaving the JIT
loading bits as a growth on the DynamicLoaderPOSIXDYLD) and we could move
it out into its own plugin type once that's working. I should have time
this coming week to get this working but if you'll also have time then I'm
happy to leave it with you.

Cheers,
Andrew


On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Keno Fischer
<kfischer at college.harvard.edu>wrote:

> I've started looking into this and it's actually not that difficult to do
> (the JIT part at least). I think the most difficult thing is
> figuring out where to put the functionality. The way I see it, the JIT
> interface is almost a DynamicLoader, with the difference
> that asking it about things like whether or not loading a dynamic library
> is safe doesn't make much sense. Another problem
> is that currently there's a 1:1 relationship between Processes and
> DynamicLoaders. Perhaps a new class of Plugins
> (JITLoader?) could be added with a 1:n relationship to processes. Some of
> the interface (I'm thinking
>  DidLaunch,DidAttach,Get/SetStopWhenImagesChange) could be pulled out into
> an abstract base class. Does that make
> sense. I'd be happy to implement this once we decide on the design.
>
> Keno
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Andrew MacPherson <andrew.macp at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Looks great, thanks Keno. I'll look into this next week and keep you
>> posted.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Keno Fischer <
>> kfischer at college.harvard.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I have this (as I said, I haven't tried it). It seems to be a different
>>> patch.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Andrew MacPherson <
>>> andrew.macp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Keno,
>>>>
>>>> I found this old patch that hooks into the GDB JIT registration
>>>> mechanism which we were planning to use as a starting point:
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/lldb-dev/2010-December/000314.html
>>>>
>>>> If you have anything else we'd love to take a look!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Keno Fischer <
>>>> kfischer at college.harvard.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm also one of the Julia core developers and the guy currently
>>>>> working on
>>>>> debugging support. I was given a patch to add MCJIT debugging support
>>>>> to LLDB with the disclaimer that it probably doesn't work. I haven't
>>>>> tried it
>>>>> yet, so I can't say how close it is, but it's probably at least a
>>>>> starting point.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd be happy to coordinate any efforts.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Keno
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/20131228/a30ae05a/attachment.html>