linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] Merkey's Kernel Debugger

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56575.166.70.238.45.1217950327.squirrel@webmail.wolfmountaingroup.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Aug 2008 09:32:07 -0600 (MDT)
From:	jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com
To:	"Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc:	jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com,
	"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	"Stefan Richter" <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	"Josh Boyer" <jwboyer@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Merkey's Kernel Debugger

> On Wednesday 06 August 2008 01:19, jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 06 August 2008 01:02, jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com
>> wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 --
>> >> > geert@...ux-m68k.org
>> >>
>> >> No I was not, but I am now.  At any rate, I removed the
>> Microsoft-isms
>> >> from the code.  I can cut yet another patch for git6, but git5 was
>> there
>> >> -- GPL2 and all.  How about putting in into the kernel guys -- :-)
>> >
>> > Seriously? Because it doesn't seem to have had enough peer review,
>> > it hasn't had widespread testing in somewhere like linux-next or
>> > -mm, and we already have kgdb so you have to also explain why you
>> > can't improve kgdb in the areas it trails mdb.
>>
>> If you go back to LKML from 2000, this debugger has been around for 10
>> years.  I agree not in the hands of the public, but its very mature
>> in comparison to kdb or kgdb.
>
> OK I don't doubt that at all, but I just mean in terms of being reviewed
> by Linux people and how it merges with the current kernel (eg. we now
> have a debugger, which was unthinkable in 2000 :)).
>
>
>> > But the ideal outcome would be if you could contribute patches to
>> > kgdb to the point where it is as good as mdb. It is already in the
>> > tree and supported by a handful of architectures... any chance of
>> > that? (I don't know kernel debugger code, so I ask as an interested
>> > user)
>>
>> I plan to work on kdb and yes, there is a version of this that runs
>> as an alternate debugger of kdb - you can even switch back and forth
>> between them - but that misses the point as well.
>>
>> I can wait untl its more widespread -- or not.
>
> That would be great if you do work on kgdb... But I guess I do miss
> the point, then. Is there a technical difference with kgdb that cannot
> be worked around, a difference of opinion with maintainers, a wish to
> have mdb features at short notice?


Nick, its OK.  There have been 27,453 downloads of the patches from my ftp
server since yesterday when I osted it -- from what I am seeing people are
voting with their feet.   People can get it and I even posted it t
SourceForge as well.  After ten years of working on Linux I thougt it
would be nice for something I wrote to end up there.  It will happen when
its time.  As it stands, people are using it and it is going to help a lot
of folks, which is what this is all about.

:-)

Jeff
>


--
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/