Hi -
Yes, I agree that we probably need both, pure disassembly mode and a mixed
mode (interlacing source and disassembly).
In some cases, e.g. when showing disassembly in the Memory View or when
debug information is not available, it may not be possible to show source
interlacing with disassembly. This is when the pure disassembly mode
comes
in handy.
This is a summary of the disassembly rendering requirements and I will
document this onto the wiki page:
* Need a generic disassembly rendering
* Need a generic mixed mode disassembly rendering where source is
interlaced with disassembly (Maybe we can have one rendering that
supports
both modes. This is something that we can discuss.)
* We need to be able to show source and disassembly rendering side by
side. There needs to be some integration between the source editor and
the
disassembly rendering.
* Highlighting in a disassembly rendering can be controlled by some
context provided by the source editor. (e.g. We need to be able highlight
more than one disassembly statements based on the cursor location from the
source editor.)
* Highlighting in the source editor can be controlled by some context
provided by the disassembly rendering. (e.g. If the user highlight some
disassembly statements, the source editor should highlight their
corresponding source.)
* We need to show these renderings in the Memory View and possibly in an
editor.
* In the case when the renderings are shown in an editor, we need to be
able to support breakpoints, stepping, and run to line actions.
* Need to be able to render some random memory location to disassembly.
In
the case where source is available, render memory in mixed mode.
Let me know if I miss anything...
Thanks...
Samantha
Kirk Beitz
<kirk@freescale.c
om> To
Sent by: Device Debugging developer
dsdp-dd-dev-bounc discussions
es@xxxxxxxxxxx <dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
05/22/2006 05:52 Subject
PM Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] Memory View
Technology Subgroup Discussion
Please respond to
Device Debugging
developer
discussions
<dsdp-dd-dev@ecli
pse.org>
samantha ++
on a separate sub-topic ... back to disassembly ...
regarding specifically what you stated: "Intead of having them
interlaced, source and disassembly are shown side-by-side."
- for some situations, interlacing source & disassembly is
probably still a desired use case by many of our current
users who will still want this as we go to eclipse.
i envisioned a scenario of a disassembly view very much as
ted had proposed, where no matter how much stepping occurs,
the "disasm" view remains forward, with source interleaved
for all addresses within the view.
wouldn't it be possible to simply have two variants of the
rendering engine, one that produces straight assembly for
this view, and the other which interleaves source into it?
- for other situations, the side-by-side view will be the only
way to go. we have optimized code debugging scenarios where
there is not necessarily a 1-to-1 mapping in either direction
when it comes to the generated code. this presents 2 problems:
one is that interleaved mixed-mode becomes meaningless. two
is that it becomes necessary in the side-by-side view to be
able to highlight several non-contiguous lines of assembly
per source, or even in some cases, several non-contiguous
lines of source for a single assembly instruction.
to go with all of this, we'd certainly like the ability to
take any random bit of memory shown in the memory view and
have it be rendered as assembly as well as mixed/interleaved
in appropriate cases.
thanks,
++ kirk
Samantha Chan wrote:
Hi Ted -
Here's how I envision this to work when embedding a disassembly rendering
in the editor. The editor could be a mult-pane editor. It has two
panes,
a source pane and an optional disassembly pane.
The source pane acts as the master of the editor. The disassembly pane
acts as a slave to the source pane. The content of the disassembly pane
is
controlled by the cursor location of the source pane, meaning that we can
show instructions that are associated with the selected line of source
code. The disassembly rendering should also be able to show disassembly
from an arbitrary address.
When a debug session is suspended, an instructional pointer is put in the
source pane. The disassembly pane would show disassembly code from the
current source line. It should also have an instructional pointer placed
at the current instruction. Depending on which editor has focus,
stepping
could mean different things. If the source pane has focus, stepping
would
mean stepping a line of code. If the disassembly pane has focus,
stepping
would mean stepping a line of instruction.
You can continue to edit source from the source editor. (Not sure if hot
code replace is possible, but if you edit a line of source, the
disassembly
pane can be updated to show changes too...)
When debugging, user has the option of hiding the source pane and only
look
at the disassembly pane. I think this is a different way of having a
mixed
mode where source and disassembly are shown together. Instead of having
them interlaced, source and disassembly are shown side-by-side.
Of course, when the debug session is terminated, the disassembly pane
should be removed / hidden. Also need to think about how breakpoints
should be handled in this case.
This makes it more obvious that the disassembly source is generated and
that user cannot edit the disassembly source. But user can continue to
edit the source code from the source pane.
Thanks...
Samantha
"Williams, Ted"
<ted.williams@win
driver.com>
To
Sent by: "Device Debugging developer
dsdp-dd-dev-bounc discussions"
es@xxxxxxxxxxx <dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
05/17/2006 08:44
Subject
PM RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Memory View
Technology Subgroup Discussion
Please respond to
Device Debugging
developer
discussions
<dsdp-dd-dev@ecli
pse.org>
Samantha> "What I meant was that if the editor that we use implements
the IMemoryRenderingContainer and IMemoryRenderingSite interfaces, an
editor can potentially display a memory rendering. In this case, the
disassembly rendering can be shown in the editor. We can resuse the
code in a disassembly rendering and do not have to come up with two
different solutions for showing disasembly in the Memory View and in an
editor."
When I think of mixed mode, two distinctly different use cases come to
mind: source based and address based. Source based (mixed mode) is
useful when I'm debugging source. I might instruction step in this mode,
but mainly, I enable it because I'm curious which instructions were
generated by the compiler. I think the editor provides the better
experience for this mode. I often edit while I'm stepping, if only to
add comments. When I do edit code, completion and syntax highlighting
are essential -- I don't see any advantage to editing source outside of
the editor. The second mode, address based, is useful when my focus is
instruction stepping. No matter how many times I step, I never leave the
frame. Additionally, this mode allows me to see instructions beyond a
single source file. The memory view is a close fit, but its real estate
is poor. I want to step disassembly in the editor region, where there
will be sufficient width for the interspersed source lines.
Samantha, can you elaborate on your proposal (above)? A disassembly
editor could implement IMemoryRenderingContainer and share the memory
view rendering. This sounds useful for the address based mode. But, how
would the rendering enhance the source based mode? What would the
connection be between the source editor and the memory rendering?
ted
_______________________________________________
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
--
- Kirk Beitz - vox:(858)272-8858 - fax:(858)273-8858 -
cell:(619)888-9408 -
- mailto:kirk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - CodeWarrior -
http://www.codewarrior.com -
_______________________________________________
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
