Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:00:29 -0500 | From | Robin Holt <> | Subject | Re: kallsyms 2.6.8 address ordering |
| |
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 06:10:25PM +0000, jmerkey@comcast.net wrote: > I've noticed that LKML of late is unresponsive to a lot bug posts and > that email is being blocked for a lot of folks. It smells like partisan > politics based on economic motivations and its not really "open" any > more when people stoop to this level of behavior. That aside:
I attribute this to people being over busy right now.
> kallsyms in 2.6.8 is presenting module symbol tables with out of order > addresses in 2.6.X. This makes maintaining a commercial kernel debugger > for Linux 2.6 kernels nighmareish. Also, the need to kmalloc name strings > (like kdb does) from kallsyms in kdbsupport.c while IN THE DEBUGGER makes > it impossible to debug large portions of the kernel code with kdb, so I > have rewritten large sections of kallsyms.c to handle all these broken, > brain-dead cases in mdb and I am not relying much on kdb hooks anymore. > Why on earth does Linux need to have shifting tables of test strings > for module names requiring all this complexity in the symbol tables > and kallsyms.
It must be useful for people using small memory footprint machines. Check with the folks doing embedded stuff.
I remember a discussion about kallsyms and scaling problems with top reading some /proc/<pid> file.
Look at this: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=108758995727517&w=2
> I don't expect a response so I'll keep coding around the broken Linux > 2.6 code but I wanted to post a record of this so perhaps someone will > think about over-engineering systems which should be left alone. > > Jeff
Good Luck, Robin Holt - 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/
| |