[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Permanent Kgdb integration into the kernel - lets get with it.

Randy Dunlap wrote:

>>>>>In spite of kgdb, shouldn't it have that \n anyways in case some other code
>>>>>gets added in the future after the macro? Or are you saying that there should
>>>>>never be any code ever after that macro?
>>>>Sure if there is mainline code added after that macro we add the \n.
>>>>But only if it makes sense to add code there, which it didn't in kgdb.

>>>Was that because with recent enough tools and config options there was
>>>enough annotations so GDB could finally figure out where things had
>>>stopped? Thanks.
>>The reason Linus said he didn't allow George's kgdb mm patch to
>>be integrating into the kernel a year or two ago was that Amit and
>>George had significantly different implementations. So Amit, Tom,
>>George, and the rest of the kgdb development gang worked together
>>and came up with a unified version that we now support on SourceForge.

>>Tom rolled up a mm patch back in December for Andrew and then the
>>integration process stopped. I suggest we work together on getting
>>the kgdb patch back into the mm series and permanently into the kernel
>>like the kexec code and then we can avoid this kernel development

> Hi,
> Is there any movement on this?

Jason Wessel has taken up KGDB maintenance for upstream. We're now working on merging the several diverse trees together.

WBR, Sergei
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: 2007-04-17 20:39    [W:0.079 / U:4.764 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site