kdb patch for 2.6.24 and ARMv7

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Hi Jason,

Thanks for your reply.

I am more interested in kdb because,

It does not required any tools[except for heperterminal] on host side [kgdb
requires a linux pc]
Will enter automatically on kernel crash/panic and gives option to dump some
memory area.

And to me
Single stepping is not on the list.
Dis-assembly is of lower priority.

Kdump requires configuration of another kernel.
So kdb and lkcd look to suit our situation. And I have started with kdb and
I am yet investigate more on lkcd.

Thanks once again for your reply.


On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Jason Wessel
<jason.wessel at windriver.com>wrote:

> Martin Hicks wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 06:00:46PM +0900, Basavaraj Dengi wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> After applying below patches
> >> kdb-v4.4-2.6.24-common-2.bz2
> >> kdb-v4.3-2.4.20-xscale-1.bz2
> >>
> >
> > Are you really applying these two different patches?
> > I really don't know what major changes happened between v4.3 and 4.4,
> > but I'm not really shocked that things don't work.
> >
> > You might be on your own to get this working again.
> > Jason Wessel has been working on getting KB to function as a front-end
> > for KGDB.  He posted patches to LKML about a month ago.  They might be
> > of interest to you.
> >
> >
> I doubt the whole armv7 instruction set was in the old xscale patch.
> In terms of the patch set Martin mentioned, the kdb front end code does
> happen to work on ARM, but I had extra patches which I did not publish
> which contained the logic for software single stepping on ARM.  The
> reason these were never published is that whole mess deserves a complete
> re-write.  There are traps that get placed and removed and ugly extra
> exception logic in place.
> The right way to implement single stepping is to use the concept of out
> of line instruction emulation such that you can execute the instruction
> equivalent on a particular kernel thread and the final instruction would
> be a trap to indicate the end of the out of line instruction execution.
> This allows you to do things like leave a breakpoint planted or truly
> single step an individual kernel thread while not planting a breakpoint
> in shared kernel code.  This is a back burner project however at the
> current time, unless someone else wants to contribute this logic or port
> it from gdb.
> You might be better served to consider using kgdboc + gdb, if you want
> to do some instruction disassembly.
> Jason.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/kdb/attachments/20090615/308210d0/attachment.htm>

[Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Free Online Dating]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

Add to Google Powered by Linux