[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <468E86DF.4050509@web.de>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 20:15:59 +0200
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@....de>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
CC: kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: preemption counter havoc on kgdb-taken faults (was: kgdb Bad IO access)
Jason Wessel wrote:
> The only place I could foresee that kgdb could be eating extra cycles in
> the runtime case is from the die_notifier processing. Any kind of
> exception such as a page fault, trap etc... will have a few extra ops
> and checks of variables so as to determine if the debugger should take
> the exception. It looks to me like it would even benefit to add the
> check at the top of the notify hook for kgdb to exit immediately if the
> debugger is not attached.
>
> I have contemplated making some changes to KGDB so as to make the
> registration to the die_notifier to be dynamic with attaching and
> detaching of the debugger. If this is done, I would also make a change
> to allow for the case where the kernel would wait for the debugger to
> attach on any fatal fault.
At this chance... Reminds me that this old issue still seems to be
unsolved in current kgdb:
http://www.mail-archive.com/kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00442.html
I'm only looking at that spot in kgdb right now and /may/ oversee new
border conditions elsewhere. But my feeling is there are none.
Jan (looking forward to see kgdb merged)
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (251 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists