Memory map provider

[Grazfather]

Description

This change allows architectures to provide their own memory map by defining maps in the architecture. If set, then GefMemoryManager will defer to it when building maps.

This can be used for e.g. architectures that are built for use with gdbserver.

It also adds parse_info_mem (Renaming the old one to parse_monitor_info_mem) which parses the maps from this command. The Black Magic Probe provides memory maps of its targets via this command.

Checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change includes a change to the documentation, if required.
• If my change adds new code, adequate tests have been added.
• I have read and agree to the CONTRIBUTING document.

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 6a6e2a0
• Current Coverage: 71.6614%
• New Coverage: 71.6614%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 6a6e2a0
• Current Coverage: 71.6614%
• New Coverage: 71.6614%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 6a6e2a0
• Current Coverage: 71.6614%
• New Coverage: 71.6614%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[hugsy]

I like the idea of abstraction the memory map provider. But there's potential to break tons of things considering how much we rely on the mem map, so it'll need to be test the s**t out of before merging.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. You can reopen it by adding a comment to this issue.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically closed because it has not had recent activity. If you are the owner of this issue, you can either re-open it and provide a more complete description; or create a new issue. Thank you for your contributions.

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 295cbf7
• Current Coverage: 71.4300%
• New Coverage: 71.4300%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 295cbf7
• Current Coverage: 71.4300%
• New Coverage: 71.4300%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 295cbf7
• Current Coverage: 71.4300%
• New Coverage: 71.4300%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: caa641b
• Current Coverage: 71.4300%
• New Coverage: 71.2815%
• Diff: -0.14850000000001273

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 295cbf7
• Current Coverage: 71.4300%
• New Coverage: 71.4300%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 6924019
• Current Coverage: 71.4300%
• New Coverage: 71.2814%
• Diff: -0.14860000000000184

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: f7a2105
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4511%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: e6a8663
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.3027%
• Diff: -0.1483999999999952

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[hugsy]

Some things to change before merge.

Also it's a good time to add some testing to those functions, gdb output string parsing can blow up in our face at any next release.

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: c6e05f4
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.3097%
• Diff: -0.1413999999999902

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: f7a2105
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4511%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: f7a2105
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4511%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 8525c7b
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.3376%
• Diff: -0.11350000000000193

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 38579be
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4579%
• Diff: 0.006799999999998363

To this point, this PR:

• includes changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: f7a2105
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4511%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• includes changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: f7a2105
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4511%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• does not include changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: f7a2105
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.4511%
• Diff: 0.0

To this point, this PR:

• includes changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[github-actions]

🤖 Coverage Update

• Commit: 65e918e
• Current Coverage: 71.4511%
• New Coverage: 71.3767%
• Diff: -0.07439999999999714

To this point, this PR:

• includes changes to tests
• does not include changes to documentation
• does not include forbidden words

[hugsy]

👍

[blasty]

Hi, is there any reason _parse_maps does not actually attempt to populate the maps using parse_info_mem? I'm currently working on a target for which I'm providing my own barebones GDB stub remote support. Memory map information is provided by the remote to GDB as a reply to the q packet which requests Xfer:memory-map:read::. I had to hack GEF to invoke parse_info_mem to correctly populate the memory map. But perhaps there's a (good) reason I'm missing as to why this functionality is not invoked at all currently?

EDIT: I guess @Grazfather' rationale was that the right way to do it is to rely on the output of monitor info mem, which emits a Rcmd to the remote stub requesting the memory map. Though I guess parse_info_mem could still be used as a fallback if the remote stub doesn't support that?

[Grazfather]

It's not used because it's not reliable on normal linux targets. You could create a new Architecture that subtypes the real architecture, and defines a maps method that calls it, then manually set the architecture to that and you're done.