This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] plugin patch
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: "Howell, David P" <david dot p dot howell at intel dot com>
- Cc: Scott Moser <ssmoser at us dot ibm dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 10:56:42 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] plugin patch
- References: <331AD7BED1579543AD146F5A1A44D5251279DE@fmsmsx403.fm.intel.com>
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 07:47:13AM -0800, Howell, David P wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Scott Moser wrote:
>
> > Below is a patch to add plugin support to GDB. It exports a fairly
> > simple programmable interface for people to extend the functionality
> of
> > GDB via runtime loaded shared libraries in ways that may not fit with
> > the direction of the main GDB tree (not cross-platform, not stable,
> > niche audience...).
> For folks like myself that are working on an alternate architecture or
> runtime support components (in this case NGPT threads) this would be
> very useful, as I can see several info commands that I would like to
> add for M:N user mode scheduling state and LWP state display that would
> be unique to NGPT and it's implementation.
>
> Instead of having to add this to the standard gdb as a one-off for NGPT,
> I can use the standard gdb and design them as plug-ins to be loaded only
>
> when debugging NGPT applications. This feels a lot cleaner and could be
> applied for other gdb features/architectures to keep the core as small
> and efficient as possible, loading additional support/features on demand
> only when needed.
You've both given good arguments in support of a general plugin
architecture. No one's objecting to the theory (except possibly the
FSF... who this might need to be cleared with). I object to the
implementation, however.
Scott, I'm sure you have a plugin or two in mind. What interfaces do
they need? What other interfaces would be useful? I want plugins to
have a defined interaction with GDB, not be able to call into any
global function. If I were you, I'd still want this, because then we
won't break your plugins willy-nilly.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer