Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Apr 2007 22:37:13 +0400 | From | Sergei Shtylyov <> | Subject | Re: Permanent Kgdb integration into the kernel - lets get with it. |
| |
Hello.
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 >>obfuscation.
> 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 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/
| |