[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091130152910.GB10331@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:29:10 -0500
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
utrace-devel <utrace-devel@...hat.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] In-kernel gdbstub based on utrace Infrastructure.
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 04:16:50PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> [...]
> kgdb exists here and today in the kernel and you cannot just build a
> facility that doesnt replace it and doesnt integrate well with it.
Surely you don't mean that: every non-kgdb facility in the kernel
meets that definition, even all debugging-related facilities such as
perf and ftrace.
> So if a unified user/kernel model for debugging is a 'long term'
> feature in your view then perhaps this framework (which introduces
> _extensive_ hooks all around the kernel) is not designed/approached
> in the right way and should not be merged in this form.
Which "this framework" are you talking about? Please clarify what
exactly you're trying to say.
- FChE
--
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