Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Feb 2004 15:54:52 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: kgdb support in vanilla 2.6.2 |
| |
"La Monte H.P. Yarroll" <piggy@timesys.com> wrote: > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > >Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote: > > > > > >>It seems that some kgdb support is in 2.6.2-linus: > >> > >> > > > >Lots of architectures have had in-kernel kgdb support for a long time. > >Just none of the three which I use :( > > > >I wouldn't support inclusion of i386 kgdb until it has had a lot of > >cleanup, possible de-featuritisification and some thought has been applied > >to splitting it into arch and generic bits. It's quite a lot of work. > > > > > > Amit has started at least the third activity--he has split much of kgdb > into arch and generic bits.
Yes.
> Could you elaborate a little on the first two? > > What major kinds of cleanup are we talking about? Style issues?
Coding style compliance, reduction of ifdefs, etc. Reduction of patch footprint. There are a few features in the patch in -mm which I am not aware of anyone having used.
> What features (or classes of features) do you find excessive? Would > it be sufficient to add a few config items to control subfeatures > of kgdb? >
People have added timestamping infrastructure, stack overflow testing and inbuilt assertion frameworks to various gdb stubs at various times. We need to take a look at such things and really convice ourselves that they're worthwhile. Personally, I'd only be interested in the basic stub.
I need to take a look at Amit's current patch - it sounds good.
- 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/
| |