jimingham wrote:
There were a bunch of review comments that need to be addressed. But I also am
a bit nervous about adding a feature that is intended to be a general "lldb
interesting classes lifecycle notification" but when designed only supports
Debugger Lifecycle Events. Those are the sim
ZequanWu wrote:
Is there any update on this PR? I'm interested in working on a similar callback
that can be triggered when target is created, but I want to wait for this one
to get landed first as they will share some common code.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111206
__
@@ -737,19 +752,35 @@ class Debugger : public
std::enable_shared_from_this,
lldb::TargetSP m_dummy_target_sp;
Diagnostics::CallbackID m_diagnostics_callback_id;
- std::mutex m_destroy_callback_mutex;
- lldb::callback_token_t m_destroy_callback_next_token = 0;
- struct
jimingham wrote:
That seems a common enough problem that there should be a more straightforward
way to do it than having to barge into the middle of target setup...
The SBPlatform already has a "module location callback" that you can hook in to
find debug modules in a programmatic way. It a
cmtice wrote:
> I have wanted to be able to hook into target creation to be able to setup
> targets when they get created. It would be also nice to get an event when a
> process is not longer being debugged due to process exit or detach.
Something I have wanted for a long time is a stop hook j
jimingham wrote:
> (This is in reply to Jim's comment
> [here](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111206#issuecomment-2400376223).
> I can't quote it, because github garbles it beyond recognition, probably
> because it was sent by email :/)
I'm trying to remember not to believe the bi
@@ -1362,6 +1362,12 @@ enum Severity {
eSeverityInfo, // Equivalent to Remark used in clang.
};
+enum NotificationType {
+ eDebuggerWillBeCreated = (1 << 0),
+ eDebuggerWillBeDestroyed =
+ (1 << 1), // Call before debugger object is destroyed
labath w
@@ -739,16 +745,29 @@ DebuggerSP
Debugger::CreateInstance(lldb::LogOutputCallback log_callback,
g_debugger_list_ptr->push_back(debugger_sp);
}
debugger_sp->InstanceInitialize();
+
+ InvokeNotificationCallbacks(debugger_sp, lldb::eDebuggerWillBeCreated);
return debu
@@ -1703,6 +1703,30 @@ void SBDebugger::SetDestroyCallback(
}
}
+lldb::callback_token_t SBDebugger::AddNotificationCallback(
+lldb::NotificationType type,
+lldb::SBNotificationCallback notification_callback, void *baton) {
+ LLDB_INSTRUMENT_VA(type, notification_cal
@@ -1024,6 +1024,46 @@ static void
LLDBSwigPythonCallPythonLogOutputCallback(const char *str,
}
}
+// For NotificationCallback functions
+static void LLDBSwigPythonCallPythonSBNotificationCallback(
+ lldb::NotificationType type, lldb::SBDebugger &debugger,
+ lldb::SBExec
@@ -1703,6 +1703,30 @@ void SBDebugger::SetDestroyCallback(
}
}
+lldb::callback_token_t SBDebugger::AddNotificationCallback(
+lldb::NotificationType type,
+lldb::SBNotificationCallback notification_callback, void *baton) {
+ LLDB_INSTRUMENT_VA(type, notification_cal
@@ -739,16 +745,29 @@ DebuggerSP
Debugger::CreateInstance(lldb::LogOutputCallback log_callback,
g_debugger_list_ptr->push_back(debugger_sp);
}
debugger_sp->InstanceInitialize();
+
+ InvokeNotificationCallbacks(debugger_sp, lldb::eDebuggerWillBeCreated);
return debu
labath wrote:
(This is in reply to Jim's comment
[here](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111206#issuecomment-2400376223).
I can't quote it, because github garbles it beyond recognition, probably
because it was sent by email :/)
You're right, I have misunderstood the intention. The th
@@ -737,19 +752,35 @@ class Debugger : public
std::enable_shared_from_this,
lldb::TargetSP m_dummy_target_sp;
Diagnostics::CallbackID m_diagnostics_callback_id;
- std::mutex m_destroy_callback_mutex;
- lldb::callback_token_t m_destroy_callback_next_token = 0;
- struct
jimingham wrote:
I couldn't see what the `original_callback` argument and ivar are for? They
just seem to get copied around but not used?
We should also add a command way to add these, but it doesn't make sense to do
that for the debugger created and destroyed ones because the command
interp
@@ -1362,6 +1362,12 @@ enum Severity {
eSeverityInfo, // Equivalent to Remark used in clang.
};
+enum NotificationType {
jimingham wrote:
Might be good to put a comment here saying (a) this is used for
SBNotificationCallbacks and (b) this is where you shou
@@ -1362,6 +1362,12 @@ enum Severity {
eSeverityInfo, // Equivalent to Remark used in clang.
};
+enum NotificationType {
+ eDebuggerWillBeCreated = (1 << 0),
jimingham wrote:
Yes, it's not useful to call this before the new Debugger is fully initialized.
@@ -569,6 +569,18 @@ class Debugger : public
std::enable_shared_from_this,
SetDestroyCallback(lldb_private::DebuggerDestroyCallback destroy_callback,
void *baton);
+ /// Add a notification callback when notification type event happens. Return
a
+ ///
@@ -569,6 +569,18 @@ class Debugger : public
std::enable_shared_from_this,
SetDestroyCallback(lldb_private::DebuggerDestroyCallback destroy_callback,
void *baton);
+ /// Add a notification callback when notification type event happens. Return
a
--
@@ -138,7 +138,10 @@ class LLDB_API SBUnixSignals;
typedef bool (*SBBreakpointHitCallback)(void *baton, lldb::SBProcess &process,
lldb::SBThread &thread,
lldb::SBBreakpointLocation &location);
-
+ty
@@ -138,7 +138,10 @@ class LLDB_API SBUnixSignals;
typedef bool (*SBBreakpointHitCallback)(void *baton, lldb::SBProcess &process,
lldb::SBThread &thread,
lldb::SBBreakpointLocation &location);
-
+ty
@@ -1362,6 +1362,12 @@ enum Severity {
eSeverityInfo, // Equivalent to Remark used in clang.
};
+enum NotificationType {
+ eDebuggerWillBeCreated = (1 << 0),
clayborg wrote:
Should this be `eDebuggerWasCreated` to indicate that a debugger object was
creat
https://github.com/jeffreytan81 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111206
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
23 matches
Mail list logo
