[lldb][windows] bump the Windows API minimum version

[charles-zablit]

This patch bumps the required Windows version in LLDB from Vista to Windows 1809 RS5 (Windows 10, Nov 2018).

This is required in order to get the following merged:

• [lldb][windows] add Windows Virtual Console support #168729

Please see the following RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-drop-support-running-llvm-on-windows-vista-7-8/80619/23

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-platform-windows

@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb

Author: Charles Zablit (charles-zablit)

Changes

This patch bumps the required Windows version in LLDB from Vista to Windows 1809 RS5 (Windows 10, Nov 2018).

This is required in order to get the following merged:

• [lldb][windows] add Windows Virtual Console support #168729

Please see the following RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-drop-support-running-llvm-on-windows-vista-7-8/80619/23

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/170284.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) lldb/include/lldb/Host/windows/windows.h (+2-2)

diff --git a/lldb/include/lldb/Host/windows/windows.h b/lldb/include/lldb/Host/windows/windows.h
index d53d4b9967268..bb6695a112c7d 100644
--- a/lldb/include/lldb/Host/windows/windows.h
+++ b/lldb/include/lldb/Host/windows/windows.h
@@ -9,9 +9,9 @@
 #ifndef LLDB_lldb_windows_h_
 #define LLDB_lldb_windows_h_
 
-#define NTDDI_VERSION NTDDI_VISTA
+#define NTDDI_VERSION NTDDI_WIN10_RS5
 #undef _WIN32_WINNT // undef a previous definition to avoid warning
-#define _WIN32_WINNT _WIN32_WINNT_VISTA
+#define _WIN32_WINNT _WIN32_WINNT_WIN10
 #define WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN
 #define NOGDI
 #undef NOMINMAX // undef a previous definition to avoid warning

[AaronBallman]

Please see the following RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-drop-support-running-llvm-on-windows-vista-7-8/80619/23

This RFC was explicitly rejected; I think a new RFC should be posted to determine whether this is acceptable to the community or not.

[aganea]

Please see the following RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-drop-support-running-llvm-on-windows-vista-7-8/80619/23

This RFC was explicitly rejected; I think a new RFC should be posted to determine whether this is acceptable to the community or not.

@AaronBallman I think Charles was asking relatively to bumping the version in lldb/ not in llvm/. Is that acceptable? I agree that we should keep compatibility as it is in llvm.

@charles-zablit Is it possible otherwise to gate #168729 under a runtime feature flag? Such as checking the OS version at runtime and dynamically retrieving the virtual console APIs. We’re already doing that in some places in llvm/lib/Support/.

[charles-zablit]

Please see the following RFC: discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-drop-support-running-llvm-on-windows-vista-7-8/80619/23

This RFC was explicitly rejected; I think a new RFC should be posted to determine whether this is acceptable to the community or not.

I have just created a new RFC to discuss this: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-drop-support-for-lldb-on-windows-vista-7-8-and-early-versions-of-10/89037

@charles-zablit Is it possible otherwise to gate #168729 under a runtime feature flag? Such as checking the OS version at runtime and dynamically retrieving the virtual console APIs. We’re already doing that in some places in llvm/lib/Support/.

I have not tried it, but I think It is possible yes. However, lldb-dap will greatly benefit from this new ConPTY API and I think saying we support it on Windows Vista/7/8 with a limited/broken subset of features is confusing.

[AaronBallman]

This RFC was explicitly rejected; I think a new RFC should be posted to determine whether this is acceptable to the community or not.

@AaronBallman I think Charles was asking relatively to bumping the version in lldb/ not in llvm/. Is that acceptable? I agree that we should keep compatibility as it is in llvm.

I don't think lldb should have different platform requirements than everything else in the project; that would be novel AFAIK.

@charles-zablit Is it possible otherwise to gate #168729 under a runtime feature flag? Such as checking the OS version at runtime and dynamically retrieving the virtual console APIs. We’re already doing that in some places in llvm/lib/Support/.

+1, that's the approach I would expect unless there's a strong reason not to (like, we need to do it for dozens of APIs, that sort of thing).

I have not tried it, but I think It is possible yes. However, lldb-dap will greatly benefit from this new ConPTY API and I think saying we support it on Windows Vista/7/8 with a limited/broken subset of features is confusing.

I don't think we'd say we support it on those platforms; I'd document that we support the functionality when it's available on the platform. Or is lldb-dap going to be such a different product on those platforms due to the lack of the feature that it would cause user confusion?

[charles-zablit]

I replied in a comment on the RFC to centralize the discussion.