On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:01:24PM -0600, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 03:34:47PM -0600, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> > >
> > > KDB is putrid. Can it debug double faults? NO. Can it debug complex
> > > register and numeric evaluation statements like IF ((EAX == 1) &&
> > > [ESP-4] == 0x3000)? NO. Can it debug nested task gate exceptions?
> > remote gdb does that fine.
> > I've never seen a nested task gate on Linux...
> Of course not. Linux does not have a kernel debugger, or it would use
> them. That's what they are used for -- debugging running tasks from a
> kernel debugger that has it's own task gates. If you have nested task
> gates, then you can debug the kernel debugger with them.
It just does not seem to be needed. The remote gdb stub is so simple
that it is probably not worth it (it just reads packets from the serial
line and executes very simple commands like read memory etc.). I don't
see much point in debugging that.
> > priority being interrupts/bhs). Also the sleep locking seems to be generally
> > simple enough that it is not a problem for user processes.
> It will be when Linux finally implements real sleep locks in the kernel
> instead of aliased semaphores.
No doubt. I admit even gdb support for that is very poor (=non existent),
but the Linux strategy of avoiding problems with that by using very
simple locking seems to have worked reasonably so far.
[but it didn't work for you, sorry]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:14 EST