Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:41:46 -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?
Yes, switching from one of 3 choices to the other. It's not as simple as 8250 or eth. It's 8250 or eth or arch for things which don't depend on other initcalls. This leads to things in the PPC code like: #ifdef CONFIG_KGDB_8250 extern ... kgdb_serial = &kgdb8250_serial; #elif defined(CONFIG_PPC_SIMPLE_SERIAL) kgdb_serial = &kgdbppc_serial; #endif
And then all kgdb_arch_init's have to have kgdb_serial = &kgdb8250_serial, for it to work prior to the initcall setting it.
-- 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/
| |