Bug 580259: Not all remote session have a connected process #49
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -285,19 +285,13 @@ protected boolean doIsDebuggerAttachSupported() { | |
| // NOTE: when we support multi-process in all-stop mode, | ||
| // we will need to interrupt the target to when doing the attach. | ||
| int numConnected = getNumConnected(); | ||
|
|
||
| if (numConnected == 1 && sessionType == SessionType.REMOTE) { | ||
| // Bug 528145: Special case for remote sessions with an existing connection. | ||
| return true; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return numConnected == 0; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return true; | ||
|
|
@@ -333,38 +327,38 @@ public void attachDebuggerToProcess(final IProcessDMContext procCtx, final Strin | |
| public void execute(final RequestMonitor rm) { | ||
| // The remote session is already connected to the process | ||
| // Bug 528145 | ||
| if (fBackend.getSessionType() == SessionType.REMOTE | ||
| && doCanDetachDebuggerFromProcess()) { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I am unable to understand the reason for this condition.. I am running multi-gdbserver and attaching to second process using There was a problem hiding this comment. @umairsair can you raise a new issue for this please so we can get it tested and resolved. There was a problem hiding this comment. @jonahgraham I'll try to work on it in detail and will submit a patch if there is really an issue on CDT side and not something in my local setup.. |
||
| rm.done(); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| getProcessesBeingDebugged(procCtx, new ImmediateDataRequestMonitor<IDMContext[]>(rm) { | ||
| @Override | ||
| protected void handleSuccess() { | ||
| assert getData() != null; | ||
|
|
||
| boolean found = false; | ||
| for (IDMContext dmc : getData()) { | ||
| IProcessDMContext procDmc = DMContexts.getAncestorOfType(dmc, | ||
| IProcessDMContext.class); | ||
| if (procCtx.equals(procDmc)) { | ||
| found = true; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if (found) { | ||
| // abort the sequence | ||
| Status failedStatus = new Status(IStatus.ERROR, GdbPlugin.PLUGIN_ID, | ||
| REQUEST_FAILED, | ||
| MessageFormat.format(Messages.Already_connected_process_err, | ||
| ((IMIProcessDMContext) procCtx).getProcId()), | ||
| null); | ||
| rm.done(failedStatus); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| super.handleSuccess(); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -477,24 +471,25 @@ protected void handleCompleted() { | |
| public void execute(RequestMonitor rm) { | ||
| // This call end the current attach to the gdbserver in remote session | ||
| // Bug 528145 | ||
| if (fBackend.getSessionType() == SessionType.REMOTE | ||
| && doCanDetachDebuggerFromProcess()) { | ||
| rm.done(); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // For non-stop mode, we do a non-interrupting attach | ||
| // Bug 333284 | ||
| boolean shouldInterrupt = true; | ||
| IMIRunControl runControl = getServicesTracker().getService(IMIRunControl.class); | ||
| if (runControl != null && runControl.getRunMode() == MIRunMode.NON_STOP) { | ||
| shouldInterrupt = false; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| boolean extraNewline = targetAttachRequiresTrailingNewline(); | ||
| ICommand<MIInfo> miTargetAttach = fCommandFactory.createMITargetAttach(fContainerDmc, | ||
| ((IMIProcessDMContext) procCtx).getProcId(), shouldInterrupt, extraNewline); | ||
| fCommandControl.queueCommand(miTargetAttach, | ||
| new ImmediateDataRequestMonitor<MIInfo>(rm)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Because of this change, connect option is always available in context menu of debug session even for all-stop mode but debug new executable is grayed out.. I am using "C/C++ Attach to Application" with "gdbserver" as debugger..
I'll further look into https://git.eclipse.org/r/c/cdt/org.eclipse.cdt/+/188851