Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 30 Oct 2004 01:13:22 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [patch 7/8] KGDB support for x86_64 |
| |
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 11:34:21AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> > This adds KGDB support for x86_64.
Can you please explain what the additional hooks are good for?
> +++ linux-2.6.10-rc1-trini/arch/x86_64/kernel/Makefile 2004-10-29 11:26:45.757144605 -0700 > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ obj-y := process.o semaphore.o signal.o > setup64.o bootflag.o e820.o reboot.o warmreboot.o > obj-y += mce.o > > +CFLAGS_vsyscall.o := -g0 > +
What's this?
> +#include <linux/kgdb.h> > #include <asm/uaccess.h> > #include <asm/io_apic.h> > > @@ -103,6 +104,13 @@ asmlinkage unsigned int do_IRQ(struct pt > __do_IRQ(irq, regs); > irq_exit(); > > + /* > + * Do not call breakpoint as on the x86_64 architecture if the > + * exception tables are not set. > + */ > + if(CHECK_EXCEPTION_STACK()) > + kgdb_process_breakpoint(); > +
And that? Why do you need to check breakpoints in interrupts?
> #include <linux/moduleparam.h> > +#include <linux/debugger.h> > > #include <asm/system.h> > #include <asm/uaccess.h> > @@ -642,7 +643,7 @@ asmlinkage void *do_debug(struct pt_regs > tsk->thread.debugreg6 = condition; > > /* Mask out spurious TF errors due to lazy TF clearing */ > - if (condition & DR_STEP) { > + if (condition & DR_STEP && !debugger_step) {
This also looks bogus. What is this exactly for and why is it not handled through the debug chain?
-Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |