RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Re: [cdt-dev] Re: New Debug Model

["Gaff, Doug" <doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Cross posting to DD list.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On
> Behalf Of Adam Finucane
> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 6:45 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] Re: [cdt-dev] Re: New Debug Model
> 
> Hello Pawel,
> 
> Just letting you known that there are some third party tools that use
the
> CDT
> debugger APIs, namely us.
> 
> We use the existing CDI debugger framework to provide simulators and
> hardware
> debuggers for some embedded microprocessors. The simulator is pure
Java,
> the
> in circuit debugger is a mix of Java and JNI, we don't use GDB.
> 
> We have our own low level framework from which we implement specific
> debuggers
> for each chip we want to support. We provide the common glue between
the
> CDI
> interfaces and our own low level interfaces.
> 
> We haven't gone into complex breakpoints yet, I can see that this
could be
> a
> problem if we do try to implement them, but generally speaking we have
the
> interface to be good so far. Some small issues have popped up,
basically
> memory spaces not being supported but I understand that this is being
> implemented in the next release of CDT, and it wasn't difficult to
work
> around. The other issue that popped up is, because we didn't use GDB,
we
> had
> to implement our own expression parser. We implemented a bare bones
> 'expression parser' that simple parses literals, but it would be nice
if
> there was a framework all ready in place and all that would have to be
> done
> would be to provide the sizes of types and symbol lookups.
> 
> Adam Finucane
> 
> HI-TECH Software
> E-mail: adam@xxxxxxxxxx
> Web   : www.htsoft.com
> 
> 
> On Saturday 20 May 2006 07:53, Pawel Piech wrote:
> > Hi Aaron,
> > I understand what you're getting at.  Both the platform debug model
and
> > CDT (and JDT) provide a set of standard interfaces for the various
types
> > of objects in a given debugger implementation.  So I would love to
know
> > how many third party tools are there that take advantage of these
APIs
> > and with what level of success.  Also, assuming that there are some
such
> > tools out there, does it mean that whatever new debug model we come
up
> > with, will it have to be compatible with these legacy debug models?
> >
> > In our experience, we get sporadic requests for APIs to integrate
third
> > party tools with, and in some cases the platform debug model is
> > sufficient, but in some cases it is not... especially with respect
to
> > breakpoints.  This is fine, it can be argued that if we implemented
the
> > CDI interfaces, we would have a higher-level of compatibility with
3rd
> > party tools because it provides more functionality.  But it seems
that
> > there is always going to be some custom functionality in embedded
> > debuggers (for example specific types of hardware breakpoints), that
are
> > not going to be covered by any standard API.  Plus having these
> > expansive sets of interfaces can be rather expensive to design,
> > implement, and maintain.  Meanwhile, it's so hard to tell what
> > functionality a 3rd party vendor would actually use.
> >
> > So I'm wondering whether there are more specific use cases that
people
> > know of which would help us come up with alternatives to this
standard
> > hierarchical interface approach.  An example of this might be for
each
> > debugger implementation to expose sets of commands (such as
resetting,
> > downloading, setting breakpoints, etc.) that can be applied on the
> > different objects belonging to that debugger, then have some limited
> > framework that would let users and tool vendors use these commands
in
> > scripts or some other configurable mechanisms.
> >
> > -Pawel
> >
> > Spear, Aaron wrote:
> > > Pawel,
> > >
> > > I will take a stab at what I think Ken is getting at:  I would
think
> the
> > > use case would be any other vendor that wanted to build something
on
> top
> > > of a debugger and have it work with multiple debuggers.  So in
theory
> > > they write their tool and then can run it on top of anyones
embedded
> > > debugger (CDT or WorkBench or EDGE or ...).  Say for example an
RTOS
> > > vendor that wanted to write kernel awareness of some kind that
> listened
> > > for events and then iterated global variables displaying their
data
> > > structures on a target stop.  Another example would be
semiconductor
> > > vendors who want to add views and such that are specific to
features
> of
> > > their chips and have it run on multiple debuggers.  We are asked
about
> > > this all the time.  More than once I have heard "We can just write
an
> > > Eclipse plugin right?"  Sure provided the framework is there...
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > > Aaron
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pawel Piech
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 4:44 PM
> > > To: CDT General developers list.
> > > Cc: Device Debugging developer discussions
> > > Subject: Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] Re: [cdt-dev] Re: New Debug Model
> > >
> > > Hi Ken,
> > > I totally agree with everything you're saying, it's just a really
> tough
> > > challenge: to design a standard debug model implementation in
> > > components, such that they can be selectively replaced to provide
> custom
> > > functionality... a very worthy goal though.
> > >
> > > Still what I'm struggling with right now is the question of "other
> > > tools" and interoperability between models.  What are the specific
> > > use-cases for other tools accessing the debug model?  And what
> features
> > > require debug models to collaborate with each other?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Pawel
> > >
> > > Ken Ryall wrote:
> > >> Pawel,
> > >>
> > >> For now just a couple thoughts:
> > >>
> > >> The new platform model is wonderfully flexible but a model for
C/C++
> > >> debuggers needs to provide enough common structure to make it
> reusable
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> across back-ends. Otherwise there is not much to leverage and
other
> > >> tools don't have a way to address debugger stuff. The more common
> > >> elements we can put into the model, the more we can collaborate.
> > >>
> > >> A debug model for C/C++ should as much as possible allow the
back-end
> > >> to provide as rich a debug experience as it can. That's not to
say
> > >> that the model has to let every back-end interact exactly the way
it
> > >> wants to, some glue and various adjustments will usually be
> necessary.
> > >>
> > >> A debug model should address the most common debugger use cases
and
> > >> let back-ends opt out and do their own thing when they do
something
> > >> wildly different. But in those cases the benefits of the model
should
> > >> also provide an incentive for people to adjust their debugger
> > >> back-ends to better match the model.
> > >>
> > >> Looking forward to a more in-depth discussion later on.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks - Ken
> > >>
> > >>> From: ext Pawel Piech <pawel.piech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> Reply-To: Device Debugging developer discussions
> > >>> <dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:03:29 -0700
> > >>> To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> Cc: Device Debugging developer discussions
<dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> Subject: [dsdp-dd-dev] Re: [cdt-dev] Re: New Debug Model (was:
> Editor
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> technology subgroup)
> > >>>
> > >>> As promised, I started on defining the requirements for an
optimal
> > >>> debug model design for embedded debugging.  I took kind of a fun
> > >>> approach to the problem, so please let me know if you think it's
> > >>> confusing or inappropriate.
> > >>> -Pawel
> > >>>
> > >>> See: http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/DSDP/DD/DebugModel
> > >>>
> > >>> Pawel Piech wrote:
> > >>>> Hi All,
> > >>>> I'll start off by apologizing.  I've been meaning to edit the
> > >>>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/DSDP/DD/DebugModel to start
> > >>>> collecting requirements, but it seems like such a daunting task
> that
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I ended up putting it off week after week :-(  So rather than
make
> > >>>> up more excuses I'll make sure that I get started on it today.
If
> > >>>> anyone already has a set of requirements written up, please
feel
> > >>>> free to post them on the twiki page or mail them to the list,
it'll
> > >>>> make this process a lot easier.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Separately, we have been working on a prototype that we will
commit
> > >>>> to CVS shortly.  This is the same prototype that we talked
about in
> > >>>> the February DSDP meeting, except we have rewritten it a couple
of
> > >>>> time since to take advantage of standards that are in JDK 5.0
and
> in
> > >
> > > OSGI.
> > >
> > >>>> At this point, aside from javadocs and example code, the
prototype
> > >>>> code is ready to commit, we're just waiting to get the required
> > >>>> signatures from within the company.  So rather than try to
describe
> > >>>> what this thing is about, I'd rather wait another week or so
and
> > >>>> just post the code for everyone to look at.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -Pawel
> > >>>>
> > >>>> P.S. I just signed up for dsdp-dd-dev and cdt-dev... better
late
> > >>>> then never.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Oberhuber, Martin wrote:
> > >>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> while Doug Gaff is at the WR User Conference in Orlando, let
me go
> > >>>>> ahead and start the new thread :-)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Yes, Pawel P has made quite some progress on prototyping
against
> > >>>>> the Flexible Debug Model. Sine quite a bit of this is based on
> > >>>>> former WR proprietary code, we'll need to wait for IP
clearance
> > >>>>> before we can actually make a contribution.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We hope this to happen anytime soon.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>> Martin
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Martin Oberhuber - WindRiver, Austria
> > >>>>> +43(662)457915-85
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>>>> [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ewa
> Matejska
> > >>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 8:43 PM
> > >>>>>> To: CDT General developers list.; Device Debugging developer
> > >>>>>> discussions
> > >>>>>> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology
> > >>>>>> subgroup
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I propose starting a new thread for future communications
about
> > >>>>>> the Debug Model since there's a technology subgroup in the
> > >>>>>> DSDP-DD.  I would like to leave this thread for Editor
> > >>>>>> enhancement/ideas/requests focusing on embedded development.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>> Ewa.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>>>> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > >>>>>> On Behalf Of Greg Watson
> > >>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 10:45 AM
> > >>>>>> To: CDT General developers list.
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology
> > >>>>>> subgroup
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I got confused by all the Dougs. :-) I'd like to work with
anyone
> > >>>>>> on  this!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Greg
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On May 12, 2006, at 9:48 AM, Mikhail Khodjaiants wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Doug S,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I sent my previous message before I saw yours. It is for
Doug G
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Mikhail K
> > >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Schaefer"
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:46 AM
> > >>>>>>> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology
> > >>>>>>> subgroup
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Which Doug is everyone talking about :).
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Since the Greg's note was sent to cdt-dev, I thought it was
for
> > >>>>>>>> me. This note sounds like it is for Doug G...
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems Eclipse CDT Project
Lead,
> > >>>>>>>> Tools PMC member http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>>>> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-
> > >>>>>>>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
> > >>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:35 AM
> > >>>>>>>> To: CDT General developers list.
> > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology
> > >>>>>>>> subgroup
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Doug,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> There was a special group formed among others at the last
DSDP
> > >>>>>>>> meeting to work on the design of the debug model. I
volunteered
> > >>>>>>>> to participate, but I haven't heard anything since. You
> > >>>>>>>> mentioned that Pavel and
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Ted are
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> doing
> > >>>>>>>> some work in this direction. Is there any new information
> > >>>>>>>> available on what they are doing?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>> Mikhail Khodjaiants
> > >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Watson"
> > >>>>>>>> <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>>>> To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:11 AM
> > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology
> > >>>>>>>> subgroup
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Doug,
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I wonder if we could be involved in the design of the next
> > >>>>>>>>> generation debugger model? We're also looking at how to
use
> the
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> flexible debug model
> > >>>>>>>>>           for the parallel debugger. Since we reused
> > >>>>>>>>> considerable
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> portions
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> of CDT
> > >>>>>>>>> debugger functionality in the parallel debugger
> > >>>>>>>>> implementation, it would make sense to try and combine
efforts
> > >>>>>>>>> here.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Greg
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On May 12, 2006, at 8:19 AM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> BTW, Welcome Toni!
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> We've been in need of some focus on the CDT editor for a
> while
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> and  I look forward to your contributions.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>>>> Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems Eclipse CDT Project
Lead,
> > >>>>>>>>>> Tools PMC member http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>>>>>> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>>>>>>>> [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Gaff,
> > >>>>>>>>>> Doug
> > >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 2:43 PM
> > >>>>>>>>>> To: Device Debugging developer discussions
> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: Leherbauer, Anton; CDT General developers list.
> > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi folks,
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> I've asked Toni Leherbauer from my team to provide input
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> on the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> editor.
> > >>>>>>>>>> Toni is currently looking at enhancing the CDT editor and
is
> > >>>>>>>>>> collecting some features on the CDT project plan.
> > >>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/CDT/planning/4.0
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Since there is interest in the editor in both the CDT and
DD
> > >>>>>>>>>> projects, we should keep both groups in the loop.  And of
> > >>>>>>>>>> course, we should have one editor solution in the end (in
> > >>>>>>>>>> CDT).  We started
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> discussing
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> this in
> > >>>>>>>>>> the DD project in Toronto simply as a way to capture
> > >>>>>>>>>> requirements as they related to debugging.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Also, as I mentioned on the recent DD call, Ted and Pawel
are
> > >>>>>>>>>> working on a prototype for a generic debugger
implementation
> > >>>>>>>>>> of the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Eclipse
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> 3.2
> > >>>>>>>>>> debug model interfaces (EDMI 3.2 for short).  The goal
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> is that this
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> prototype will form the basis of a next-generation
debugger
> > >>>>>>>>>> model that benefits folks using CDT and folks working
> directly
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> with the Eclipse platform today.  We intend to get this
> > >>>>>>>>>> committed in the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> next few
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> weeks
> > >>>>>>>>>> so that the community can start discussing architecture,
> > >>>>>>>>>> interfaces, and requirements.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> So regarding the editor, I see open questions around how
we
> > >>>>>>>>>> integrate disassembly, breakpoints, instruction pointers,
> etc.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> with a new debugger implementation.  I am also wondering
how
> > >>>>>>>>>> the editor will
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> deal with
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> multiple debug engines simultaneously (for example, how
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> to set the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> default breakpoint scope).
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Doug
> > >>>>
> > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> cdt-dev mailing list
> > >>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
> > >>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> cdt-dev mailing list
> > >> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
> > > dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
> > > dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev