Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Mar 2004 16:00:18 -0700 | From | Tom Rini <> | Subject | Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] Kill kgdb_serial |
| |
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 11:31:43PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi! > > > > Tom Rini wrote: > > > >Hello. The following interdiff kills kgdb_serial in favor of function > > > >names. This only adds a weak function for kgdb_flush_io, and documents > > > >when it would need to be provided. > > > > > > It looks like you are also dumping any notion of building a kernel that can > > > choose which method of communication to use for kgdb at run time. Is this > > > so? > > > > Yes, as this is how Andrew suggested we do it. It becomes quite ugly if > > you try and allow for any 2 of 3 methods. > > I do not think that having kgdb_serial is so ugly. Are there any other > uglyness associated with that?
More precisely: http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/2/11/224
-- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ - 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/
| |