On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 04:23:07PM -0500, Jason Wessel wrote:
> This patch series is a request for comments on several levels.
>
> 1) Do people find kdb useful? (See * and **)
Yes.
> 2) Would kdb folks be willing to use it if it was a front end to kgdb?
Yes.
> 3) Does kdb have a future in the mainline kernel?
Well, if someone invest the effort to clean it up, cut it into small
mergeable pieces and gets it done.
> 4) Is this a reasonable approach to have some level of
> unification to end up with a more robust kernel debugger?
Sounds fine to me.
> To get the most basic functionality, you only need the first 2 patches
> in the series. The remainder of the patches go on to incrementally
> add back some of the functionality that was removed from kdb. I made
> an attempt to try to make the first part just the generic set of
> changes required to get kdb working on 1 or more archs.
Patch 1 still containes a lot random junk. E.g. all those meminfo and
whatever hooks aren't required for a very basic kernel debugger.
|