[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [QUESTION] which kernel debugger is "best"?
    On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 19:18:39 -0800, 
    Andrew Morton <> wrote:
    >Jeremy Jackson wrote:
    >> What are people using?
    >kgdb. Tried kdb and (sorry, Keith), it's not in the same
    >league. Not by miles.

    kdb and kgdb are aimed at different debugging environments. kgdb
    requires a second machine containing the kernel compiled with -g, kdb
    lets you debug directly on the machine that failed, with or without
    compiling with -g. Almost all the differences flow from that design

    Another important niggle to me is that kgdb requires the kernel to be
    compiled with frame pointers, because that is all that gdb understands.
    On ix86 the extra register pressure from dedicating ebp to frame
    pointers can cause Heisenbugs. kdb works with and without frame

    Can kgdb handle the special hard wired calls that do not add frame
    pointers, such as __down_failed? I doubt that gdb knows how to handle

    I am not knocking kgdb, it has its place. I see a spectrum of
    debugging tools from UML through kgdb to kdb, each tool is aimed at a
    different debugging environment. Pick the right tool.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.025 / U:37.456 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site