Re: kgdb for mainline kernel: core-lite [patch 1/3]

[George Anzinger]

Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 04:50:18PM +0530, Amit S. Kale wrote:
>
> > On Monday 08 Mar 2004 4:37 pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > > "Amit S. Kale" <amitkale@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > > If you consider it an absolutely must, we can do something so that the
> > > > dirty part is kept away and info threads almost always works.
> > >
> > > Yes, I'd consider `info threads' support a must-have.  I'm rather surprised
> > > that others do not?
> >
> > Present threads support code changes calling convention of do_IRQ. Most 
> > believe that to be an absolute no.
>
>
> I believe that George's version does something totally different, with
> some macros at compile time (and binutils support, I _think_) to not
> have to change do_IRQ.

No, nothing at compile time, at least WRT the threads issue.  There is a 
completely different problem with backtracing through an interrupt or trap.  I 
have sent the patch for that which makes only minimal changes to code (one line 
I think, and that an asm line).  The rest is a dwarft2 set of code to build the 
frame description for the trap/interrupt frame.

>

--
George Anzinger   george@xxxxxxxxxx
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/