Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

> On Feb 27, 2019, at 3:14 PM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:52 PM Frédéric Riss > wrote: >> On Feb 27, 2019, at 10:12 AM, Zachary Turner > > wrote: > > >> For what it's worth, in an earlier message I mentioned

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

I'm aware that GSYM doesn't have full info, but if you're both looking at symbol-server kinds of mechanics and protocols, it would be silly to separate them into Clayborg-servers and Zach-servers just because GSYM cares mainly about line info. But whatever. You guys are designing this, go for

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:52 PM Frédéric Riss wrote: > On Feb 27, 2019, at 10:12 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > > For what it's worth, in an earlier message I mentioned that I would > probably build the server by using mostly code from LLVM, and making sure > that it supported the union of

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

> On Feb 27, 2019, at 10:12 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:39 PM Frédéric Riss > wrote: > >> On Feb 26, 2019, at 4:52 PM, Zachary Turner > > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:49 PM Frédéric Riss >

Re: [lldb-dev] When should ArchSpecs match?

Hexagon uses “hexagon-unknown-elf” as its triple when running standalone (no OS) or with QuRT (our embedded OS), which expands to “hexagon-unknown-unknown-elf” sometimes, or “hexagon-unknown--elf” other times. For Linux we use “hexagon-unknown-linux”. One issue I’ve seen is the Linux platform

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

Hi Zachary, On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 7:23 PM Zachary Turner via lldb-dev < lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > [...] > Thoughts? Having a standalone symbols interface would open many tooling possibilities, the available interfaces are too dwarfish and too primitive. This necessarily does not require

Re: [lldb-dev] When should ArchSpecs match?

> On Dec 7, 2018, at 8:10 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev > wrote: > > “Unknown” is a perfectly fine value for the os though, and I’m not suggesting > to change that. > > My point is simply that Jason’s situation (baremetal) is one that is not even > expressible by the Triple syntax. As

[lldb-dev] [8.0.0 Release] rc3 has been tagged

Dear testers, 8.0.0-rc3 was just tagged from the release_80 branch at r355015. We're running a little behind schedule now, but I think we're also close to be able to call this done. Please take a close look at this release candidate. Unless anything bad comes up, this is probably very similar

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

GSYM, as I understand it, is basically just an evolution of Breakpad symbols. It doesn't contain full fidelity debug information (type information, function parameters, etc). On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:56 PM wrote: > When I see this "parsing DWARF and turning it into something else" it is >

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: Moving debug info parsing out of process

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:39 PM Frédéric Riss wrote: > > On Feb 26, 2019, at 4:52 PM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:49 PM Frédéric Riss wrote: > >> >> On Feb 26, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Zachary Turner wrote: >> >> I would probably build the server by using mostly code from