Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] DSF Coding Camp: September 24th in Ottawa
Hi Mikhail,
I understand that you're writing the flexible hierarchy adapters directly for your custom debug model, which would not be applicable to other back ends.  However I would find it very interesting to know what kinds of problems you ran up against and if since other  people may consider this approach as well, it would be great to hear about your experience.

Cheers,
Pawel

P.S. I also find the CDI vs DSF topic rather uncomfortable so I hope we can find a gentle way to tip toe around the issue.

Mikhail Khodjaiants wrote:
Hi Pawel,
 
Just to clarify, I am not trying to come up with a generic solution. I am just using the platform API directly to integrate our COM-style backend. And I believe we'll find many common ideas and similarities in my approach and DSF's.
At the beginning I tried to understand the structure of DSF, separate the implementation details from API but it wasn't obvious and I gave up. And the timing wasn't on DSF's side.
 
Regards,
Mikhail
 
And please no more CDI vs DSF discussions :)

From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pawel Piech
Sent: 22 August 2007 16:52
To: Device Debugging developer discussions
Subject: Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] DSF Coding Camp: September 24th in Ottawa

Hi Mikhail and all,
I agree with Doug, the CDT summit seems like the more appropriate time to discuss this topic.  I would be glad to give an overview of what is involved in creating a non-MI based debugger integration using DSF and I think that there is a wider audience for this topic than the folks that would like to spend a day in a coding camp.  I also would also love to hear about the approach that you (Mikhail) took in implementing a custom model and the flexible hierarchy adapters for it.  Then, if we could find someone that has made a lot of extensions to the existing CDT model who could give a presentation on it, then we could have a balanced in-depth discussion on the three approaches that everyone would benefit from :-)

Cheers,
Pawel

Mikhail Khodjaiants wrote:
Doug,
 
We have compared CDI and DSF many times. I believe those who implemented a CDI based integration understand its limitations. The new flexible hierarchy API has been added lately to the Platform. DSF is based on this API and takes advantage of it. CDI can be ported to it but it is not a simple task especially if we want to keep it compatible with the existing implementations.
I am currently integrating our debug kernel into Eclipse and using the flexible hierarchy API directly. So far it is going quite well and I haven't had serious problems. But I would like to understand what would I gain if I use DSF.
I don't mind to discuss it at the CDT summit, but it is not related directly to CDT.
 
Mikhail
From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: 22 August 2007 15:43
To: Device Debugging developer discussions
Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] DSF Coding Camp: September 24th in Ottawa

This is definitely a discussion I’d like to have at the CDT summit. Pawel can correct me, but I believe the code camp was for people currently working on DSF integrations. During our Debug day at the summit, we can do a Q&A and compare CDI with DSF and build up a checklist to help integrators decide which to use.

Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com

From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alexiev, Dobrin
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 10:27 AM
To: Device Debugging developer discussions
Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] DSF Coding Camp: September 24th in Ottawa

Hi Pawel,

I also would like to attend.

I think Mikhail expressed exactly our main concern at TI.

And I believe it is a concern for other people that have a non GDB version of their debuggers.

Currently we integrated our debugger through CDI.

Going forward we’d like to know which of the options makes most sense considering out debugger features.

            - stay with CDI

            - go to the Platform Flexible Hierarchy.

            - use all or most of DSF

- use parts of DSF that fit most.

I know that it is not a “yes or no answer”, but information that will help us make the optimal decision will be most useful for us and I believe others that struggle with the same question.

Regards

Dobrin

From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 6:05 AM
To: Device Debugging developer discussions
Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] DSF Coding Camp: September 24th in Ottawa

Hi Pawel,

What kind of a DSF-related discussion is planned at the CDT meeting?

Personally I would like to evaluate the pros and contras of using DSF instead of implementing the new flexible-hierarchy API directly for non-gdb based backends. Also it would be very useful for developers if you present a list of high level tasks that are necessary to integrate a backend debugger into DSF.

None of these topics is directly related to CDT. At the same time people who write code for the gdb/mi implementation may not be interested. What do you think, which of the two meetings is more appropriate to discuss this type of questions?

Thanks,

Mikhail Khodjaiants

From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pawel Piech
Sent: 22 August 2007 00:37
To: Device Debugging developer discussions
Subject: [dsdp-dd-dev] DSF Coding Camp: September 24th in Ottawa

Hi All,
Thanks Dominique for the reminder.  To clean up the list of meetings on DD Wiki, I moved the long list of GDB/MI related meetings to a new GDB sub-group page.  But I also just added a link to the upcoming face to face meeting on the DD Hope page.

I haven't put anything in the agenda section because I think it depends on who will attend.  If we have a lot of folks who would like to get a first on-hands experience with DSF we should concentrate on small-scale exercises.  If it's mostly contributors, we should concentrate on upcoming design issues. 

The meeting is open to anyone, please add your name to the "Attendees" list if you would like to participate.  And if you have specific questions about DSF that you would like to have answered please add them to the Agenda as well.  I hope that by the September 6th general meeting we should be able to get a reliable head count and have a clear idea in which direction to take the coding camp.

Cheers
Pawel


Dominique Toupin (QA/EMC) wrote:

Hi Pawel,

Could you put the info (location, attendees, prerequisites, etc.) about the face to face meeting of Sept 24 on the WIKI and add a link on the main DD WIKI (http://wiki.eclipse.org/DSDP/DD).

It could also be nice to add this link on the CDT Summit page and the CDT Summit link on the Sept 24 meeting page.

I had people who are not able to find info, the link for the Sept 24 meeting doesn't seem to be on any page.

If you send the link to DD dev list (maybe CDT mailing list) it would be great.

Sorry to bother you with this I know you don't like the administrative part of being project lead.

Thanks,

/Dominique

--

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium.  Thank you.


_______________________________________________
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

Back to the top