Review Request 121721: gdb: port BreakpointController to the new interface, handle async breakpoint notifications

[Nicolai Hähnle]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121721/
-----------------------------------------------------------

(Updated Dez. 29, 2014, 12:14 nachm.)


Review request for KDevelop.


Changes
-------

Thanks to Aleix for prodding me to add another unit test. This revealed two bugs in handling manual breakpoint modifications, which are now fixed.


Repository: kdevelop


Description
-------

I apologize that this ended up as a rather large chunk of code changes. The essential changes are:

1. Use the new IBreakpointController interface, which greatly reduces the coupling between kdevplatform and kdevelop and will allow more changes without worrying about the ABI in the future (the old interface had IBreakpointController implementations poking directly at protected member variables of IBreakpointController).
2. We now listen to async notifications where GDB informs us about new, modified, and deleted breakpoints to keep the breakpoint model up-to-date. This should be both more accurate and more efficient (fewer messages sent between KDevelop and GDB) than the old approach.
3. Interrupting GDB and (if necessary) restarting the inferior is now handled transparently at the DebugSession level rather than in BreakpointController. This should make it easier to coordinate in the long run, e.g. avoiding unnecessary updates of watched variables when the program is only interrupted temporarily.

Also of note:
1. Use std::function to allow writing lambdas for the command handler callbacks.
2. SIGSEGV is no longer treated as stopping the interior. I don't see a reason why it should be treated differently from e.g. SIGBUS. Furthermore, te old code would have gotten terribly confused by a debugged process that successfully handles and recovers from a SIGSEGV.
3. Stylistic question: should QSharedPointer or std::shared_ptr be preferred?


Diffs (updated)
-----

  debuggers/gdb/breakpointcontroller.h f415922a2cddfadcc56e1fdc712ccc3e09c080b3 
  debuggers/gdb/breakpointcontroller.cpp 7a274970bb0dcc78aef946be8efe104a3257aab6 
  debuggers/gdb/debugsession.h 57df80437b1d2eea2a0ba7083af58adf19c6a808 
  debuggers/gdb/debugsession.cpp 392662440f77a2f1748c8e4c61959bec6a39cb2d 
  debuggers/gdb/gdb.h 6c7193bde17da933aa4478d25381c3750b60691e 
  debuggers/gdb/gdb.cpp 2ce000903e226b58fc4b8297dda7e7bfb9bd279a 
  debuggers/gdb/unittests/test_gdb.h f06948d57dfd6888d4a111ce30678d3a4d819f36 
  debuggers/gdb/unittests/test_gdb.cpp b9a1a6f41ce83ae3ab523526f69432786617aa24 
  debuggers/gdb/gdbcommandqueue.cpp 3ee29de62727caa4c8d61c598c27ee6770dfe8cc 
  debuggers/gdb/gdbglobal.h da6fe329e7aba55433c4fbbc54c5ce193100e971 
  debuggers/gdb/gdbcommand.cpp 8116c48ca86efabf2540066de4d0133fb232269e 
  debuggers/gdb/gdbcommandqueue.h eb676a4afd1598a6b5df92af5044d62bb8d3400a 
  debuggers/gdb/gdbcommand.h e3cf5877b11649008014d5c9aca8e570017c7550 

Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121721/diff/


Testing
-------

unit tests pass; manual testing seems fine


Thanks,

Nicolai Hähnle

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20141229/eac2955f/attachment.html>