I think that's because It uses the GDB debugger protocol and so it should be 
possible to use it as a replacement for gdbserver.

That said, I don't know if that kind of configuration is supported yet or if it 
depends on the GDB protocol extensions introduced by LLDB.

Le 26 juin 2014 à 06:03, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> a écrit :

> Forgive the potentially noobish question, as I have little to no experience 
> with GDB, but why is this called lldb-gdbserver?  Why isn't it just called 
> lldb-server?  The name makes it sounds like lldb-gdbserver doesn't apply to 
> you if you have no interest in interfacing with GDB.  Is that accurate or 
> inaccurate?
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Todd Fiala <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm targeting getting the lldb-gdbserver (llgs) branch upstreamed into the 
> lldb svn trunk by June 30th 2014 (next Monday).
> 
> The current state of the branch:
> lldb-gdbserver is essentially working for Linux x86_64 targets.  
> Breakpoints, code correlation, backtraces, expression execution in inferior 
> memory all work in simple test scenarios.
> It touches minimal code from the existing branch, although it does share a 
> fair amount of code with lldb-platform, particularly in 
> GDBRemoteCommunicationServer.
> lldb-platform for linux x86_64 is not yet implemented.  I'll be doing that 
> shortly after upstreaming so we can run the remote test suite against lldb 
> and llgs running remotely.
> I've done some work to support loading elf files for other platforms on a 
> given host.  (e.g. command-line MacOSX lldb connecting to Linux x86_64 llgs 
> somewhat works, as should FreeBSD lldb over to Linux x86_64.)  I added 
> off-host elf support for Linux, FreeBSD and NetBSD elf files if they have 
> known elf note sections to identify or use the OSABI byte in the elf header 
> and are loaded on a system different than the target ABI system.
> I've added a host of gdb-remote-protocol tests to test/tools/lldb-gdbserver.  
> These run tests against debugserver and llgs.  I used them to ensure that 
> llgs was behaving identically at the gdb-remote protocol level to 
> debugserver.  I upstreamed the vast majority of these already - they're 
> marked XFAIL for llgs.  Those are all implemented in the llgs branch and 
> passing.
> I'm doing a minimal set of tasks to complete the branch to the point of 
> upstreaming:
> Removing dead code.  I did borrow a fair amount of code from RegisterContext* 
> and the Linux ProcessMonitor, but in some cases there is more code there than 
> needed.
> Run through the FIXME comments to see if anything super egregious should be 
> fixed before upstreaming.
> If you are interested in testing llgs on a linux_x86_64 host and target, 
> please have at it.  The llgs branch is located here on github. File any 
> issues you hit on the llvm.org bugzilla.  At this point I'm looking to get it 
> in sooner than later, since more recent activity in lldb has been causing 
> merging pains and the vast majority of the llgs code paths don't intersect 
> with local debugging paths (yet).
> 
>  I appreciate any and all feedback on it.  After the Linux x86_64 support is 
> ironed out, I plan to get a few other Linux architectures working, and 
> (ultimately) getting the Android llgs working so we can debug Android devices 
> with LLDB.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Sincerely,
> Todd Fiala
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

_______________________________________________
lldb-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Reply via email to