There seems to be an DWARF to PDB converter here: https://github.com/rainers/cv2pdb
Not sure how good it is or what the license looks like... > On Apr 7, 2015, at 10:19 AM, Colin Riley <co...@codeplay.com> wrote: > > I think that's what I used. Hence why I want lldb C# bindings! But yeah. > Horridly underdocumented. > From: Zachary Turner > Sent: 07/04/2015 18:10 > To: Colin Riley; lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] [LLVMdev] PDB support in LLVM > > Btw the python tools project doesn't use Dbgeng extensibility model, it's a > newer richer extensibility framework that is even less documented (most > people probably wouldn't even know it exists) but much more powerful. And > it's all in managed code, so you get the c# stuff for free. > > But still, 4-5 weeks seems very aggressive > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:48 AM Colin Riley <co...@codeplay.com> wrote: > You could try extending the codeview and then relying on the ms linker to > emit a pdb from it (last time I checked it converts on the fly - this may > have changed recently, and what it converts may not be fully featured). > > The Debug Engine extensibility for visual studio is, as Zach says, not well > documented at all. Despite that, in the past I have had LLDB chatting in a > limited way to visual studio. It was incredibly messy, and the way I chose to > do it was go from Visual Studio -> c# -> c++/CLI -> C++ lldb api. Don't do it > that way if you attempt it: Create lldb C# bindings instead and go that > direction. I've been looking at that lately but it's a side project so cant > be relied on if you need it quickly. > > As for the time frame, 4-5 weeks isn't going to get far given the lack of > documentation. The debug engine samples don't go far enough in terms of > requiring a native C++ environment. > > Colin > > > On 07/04/2015 17:25, Zachary Turner wrote: >> It sounds like if you have a time frame of 4-5 weeks, you've got a tall >> order cut out for yourself. I don't want to say impossible, but... that's >> pretty rough. >> >> I think you've got two options: >> 1) Try to figure out how to emit PDB. The format is undocumented, so you're >> kind of on your own here. >> 2) Try to figure out how to get Visual Studio to understand DWARF. Visual >> Studio has a reasonably rich extensibility model which is also not very well >> documented, so you're probably on your own here as well. You may want to >> have a look at PythonTools for Visual Studio. It's entirely open source and >> adds Python debugging to Visual Studio. Obviously you don't need to be able >> to debug Python, but it's the best source of documentation I know of for >> extending Visual Studio in this kind of way so maybe it will help. If you >> end up doing this, it would be great if you could try to upstream it back to >> LLDB. Visual Studio integration with LLDB would be nice to have. >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 5:02 PM Rohan Bajaj <rohanbaja...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Moving to lldb-dev per suggestion. >> >> Using Visual Studio is only criteria for us. It could be DWARF or PDB. >> >> But I need to implement this soon (4-5 weeks from now). What do you >> recommend? >> >> Zachary do you also suggest using LLDB on Windows? >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 4:16 PM Chandler Carruth <chandl...@google.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:46 PM Rohan Bajaj <rohanbaja...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Is making PDB files for corresponding IR supported in LLVM latest version? >> >> Not today. >> >> >> After some searching I see llvm-pdbdump, but I want to annotate the IR with >> debug information so that when I write bitcode it has pdb information. >> >> I've heard of CodeView, but it seems to be only for line information. I want >> variable values also. >> >> I would be ok to use DWARF if Visual Studio could understand it using LLDB >> but I don't know how to do that or if it is support. >> >> Zach (CC-ed) and others are actively working on making LLDB work well on >> Windows, including reading DWARF debug information on Windows and >> potentially integration with Visual Studio (although I think that is further >> away at the moment). However, further discussion might be better on the LLDB >> mailing lists. >> >> It's worth pointing out that CodeView is **not** only for line information. >> It's for everything. It's just that LLVM currently only understands a >> subset of CodeView record types related to line information. >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lldb-dev mailing list >> >> lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > > -- > - Colin Riley > Senior Director, > Parallel/Graphics Debugger Systems > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
