[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/21] KGDB: Request to merge KGDB
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 04:25:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:23:10AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > It would also be nice to balance this out with the utrace merge, as both
> > are going to cause quite a lot of pain on the architecture side.
> I don't think a utrace merge as in one big merge is going to happen ever.
> It's just a too big patch doing too many things at once. And the flag day
> for switching all architectures over is another blocker.

I agree with Christoph - the fact that *all* architectures have to be
either ptrace or utrace make it very very painful.

What would be good is if some effort could be made by the utrace-
interested parties to make the transition to utrace much less painful.
For instance, I quite like the getregs/setregs abstractions, and it
looks like these *could* be self-contained in a single patch. It
would be nice if we could move architectures over to this one a time.
Once that's in, that's one chunk of utrace merged.

Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux -
maintainer of:
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: 2007-10-18 17:59    [W:0.048 / U:7.948 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site