[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Disassembly View Requirement
|
I agree 100%. The challenge there will be in building that framework
and, just as important, building up a pool of components that we can
all share. In our environment, the smarts to do that sort of thing
(disassemble, parse symbolics) exists as C++ code in components that
plug into our debugger engine. For the model we've been discussing in
this thread, we'd need those capabilities to exist as Eclipse
plugins. And of course, it doesn't make sense for two companies to
write, say, a dwarf parser and ARM disassembler. So, we need some
coordination to make this happen.
The framework and its layers seems like a fairly large undertaking
that should probably be driven by a dedicated technology subgroup. It
will enable quite a number of other technologies.
John
At 09:57 PM 5/30/2006, Doug Schaefer wrote:
I think we really have two different requirements. One is to view a block of
memory as disassembly, or for that matter a block of object code stored in
an executable. As well, we have the need to be able to see disassembly while
stepping through code or sitting at a breakpoint.
I don't see why we would need to pick a single solution to do both. I can
see the need for integration within an editor and within a view. We can go
for the gusto and do both. But it does point out, as Samantha said, for the
need for a core framework to produce disassembly text from different sources
for different purposes. We shouldn't have to rely on the debugger to do it.
I think doing the exercise of walking through different use cases and
figuring out how Eclipse can best serve them is a prudent thing to do at
this stage. It'll be easier to pick technologies if we understand and have
documented what the user wants to do with them.
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 Chuong, Patrick
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:05 PM
To: Device Debugging developer discussions
Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Disassembly View Requirement
John,
We have two options to show mixed mode, and I don't have any strong
opinion which way is better. They both have pros and cons. If I have a
choice, than I think it will make more sense to have the current CDT
disassembly window to show address base mixed mode and have the editor
to show source base mixed mode :)
Regards,
Patrick
-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Cortell
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:01 PM
To: Device Debugging developer discussions; Device Debugging developer
discussions
Subject: Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] Disassembly View Requirement
For what it's worth, our commercial (non-Eclipse) product supports
exactly what Samantha is describing. You can have the memory window
display disassembly, or even source, and even mixed disassembly+source.
Whether this is a hard requirement for us, that's a different story.
I don't know how disappointed our existing users will be when they
are unable to do the same in Eclipse. Certainly, of paramount
importance is being able to disassemble an arbitrary block of memory.
The rest seems like a usability issue.
John
At 04:40 PM 5/30/2006, Mikhail Khodjaiants wrote:
>Samantha,
>
>>Showing disassembly in the Memory View was one of CDT's requirements.
>
>The CDT requirement is showing memory as disassembly, not showing
>disassembly in the Memory view. It can be implemented as an
>additional memory rendering, but we have never thought of it as a
>full replacement of the Disassembly view.
>
>Mikhail Khodjaiants
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Samantha Chan" <chanskw@xxxxxxxxxx>
>To: "Device Debugging developer discussions" <dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 5:29 PM
>Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Disassembly View Requirement
>
>
>>Hi -
>>
>>Re: R1 Generic Disassembly View
>>Are we having a separate disassembly view? Or are we looking at
displaying
>>disassembly as a rendering in the Memory View? Showing disassembly in
the
>>Memory View was one of CDT's requirements.
>>
>>Re: Portable disassembly component
>>One of the requirements is to make showing disassembly as a portable
>>component and it can be "plugged" into any view or editor or anywhere
we
>>need it. e.g. the Modules View
>>
>>Re: Optimized code:
>>I think there is another requirement for dealing with optimized code.
Kirt
>>Beitz from Freescale indicated that they have cases where there is no
>>1-to-1 mapping between instructions and source code either way. They
need
>>to be able to show disassembly and source side-by-side, not
interlacing.
>>They need to be able to highlight several non-contigous lines of
>>instructions per source line... or highlight several non-contiguous
lines
>>of source lines per instruction.
>>
>>Re: Input to disassembly
>>Does it make sense to add a requirement to allow this disassembly
component
>>to accept any input for creating the disassembly "view"? e.g. We have
>>cases where it makes sense for the disassembly component to
disassemble
>>memory from a memory block and show it as disassembly instructions.
In
>>other cases, we can have a binary file as input and display its
content as
>>disassembly.
>>
>>Thanks...
>>Samantha
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Ewa Matejska"
>> <Ewa.Matejska@pal
>> msource.com>
To
>> Sent by: "Device Debugging developer
>> dsdp-dd-dev-bounc discussions"
>> es@xxxxxxxxxxx <dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
cc
>>
>> 05/30/2006 04:52
Subject
>> PM RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Disassembly
View
>> Requirement
>>
>> Please respond to
>> Device Debugging
>> developer
>> discussions
>> <dsdp-dd-dev@ecli
>> pse.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>The requirement of mixed mode/assembly/source toggle is also an Editor
>>Subgroup requirement. We should coordinate and work together on this.
>>Some of the other requirements seem relevant to the Editor as well,
such as
>>the multiple breakpoint icons.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Ewa.
>>
>>From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>[mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chuong, Patrick
>>Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 12:23 PM
>>To: Device Debugging developer discussions
>>Subject: [dsdp-dd-dev] Disassembly View Requirement
>>
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>I have updated the disassembly twiki website with the requirements
that I
>>have gather through multiple email threads in the archive. Any
feedback and
>>additional requirement is welcome. Additionally, I suggest that we
keep one
>>discussion thread for the disassembly view requirement. This can be
related
>>to the CDT disassembly view or Disassembly renderer in the Memory
view.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Patrick_______________________________________________
>>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
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
_______________________________________________
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
