[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18057.34926.788402.262293@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:21:18 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
Cc: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Mariusz Kozlowski <m.kozlowski@...land.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.22-rc6-mm1
Jason Wessel writes:
> I suppose the argument could be made to remove the check in the compiled
> file, but it does serve as a way to protect kgdb for now if someone
> tries to hard compile in xmon and kgdb. Completely unpredictable
> results will occur with the debugger unless some pieces are fixed. I
> would rather make sure until that happens there is no way head down the
> rat hole.
It should all work provided kgdb plays nicely. We used to be able to
compile in both xmon and kdb and select at runtime which one gets
used.
> That issue aside would it be useful to have xmon+kgdb? After having
> looked at the hook points for xmon, if a command was added to xmon to
> provide an "detach" it would be easy enough to have kgdb and xmon in the
> same kernel. Obviously only one or the other can be used at any given time.
Well, xmon_init(0) will do a detach. However, I don't see that it is
needed; there is plenty of flexibility to choose to have xmon or not
using the CONFIG_XMON_DEFAULT config option and the xmon= boot command
line option.
Paul.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists