Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:42:29 -0700 | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Subject | Re: Permanent Kgdb integration into the kernel - lets get with it. |
| |
Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > 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
at kgdb.sf.net or where is the work being done?
Thanks, -- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** - 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/
| |