kgdb
[Top] [All Lists]

kgdb & modules (was Re: kgdb and 2.2.14-5 from RH 6-2.)

To: Douglas Kilpatrick <dougk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: kgdb & modules (was Re: kgdb and 2.2.14-5 from RH 6-2.)
From: sfoehner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Scott Foehner)
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 16:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: kgdb@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Douglas Kilpatrick <dougk@xxxxxxxxxxx> "Re: kgdb and 2.2.14-5 from RH 6-2." (Apr 7, 6:58pm)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10004071847430.19930-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-kgdb@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 7,  6:58pm, Douglas Kilpatrick wrote:
> I can see globals of the kernel, its globals of a module that I can not
> see.  In this case I think I'm getting a different global than I thought
> I was getting.  In other cases I get "No symbol 'foo' in current context."

Ah, you're working with modules.  I am not an expert here, but I believe
changes are necessary to both kgdb and to gdb in order to see all module
symbols correctly.  Those changes are in the latest 2.3 version of kgdb, I
think.  Amit Kale had a patch that worked on gdb, but I don't know if it
was ever included in the gdb source.  I will include some excerpts from
emails that were exchanged on this subject:

Mail 1:

<some header stuff deleted>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 10:36:20 -0600
From: David Grothe <dave@xxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: dave@xxxxxxxx
<more header stuff deleted>

"Amit S. Kale" wrote:

<stuff deleted>

> 2. If you find module address and give it to gdb, gdb takes it as start of
text
> segment and may or may not calculate addresses in data and bss segments
> correctly while doint relocating symbols. A workaround for this is to do
> relocations using ld and tell gdb not to do relocations. gdb needs to be
> patched for this.

I just ran into this same problem.  I am glad that you have found it and fixed
it.
I will integrate your fixes.  If we need to patch gdb itself I think that I
will
place a copy of the patched gdb on our FTP site in the same directory as kgdb
to
make it easy for users.

Any chance that your changes will make it into a future "official" version of
gdb?

<rest deleted>


Mail 2 (similar parts deleted as in previous mail):

From: "Amit S. Kale" <akale@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Veritas Software (India)
To: David Grothe <dave@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: kgdb-2.3.38 [ Re: kgdb-2.3.35 ]
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:28:53 +0530
Cc: Scott Foehner <sfoehner>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@xxxxxxx>

Hi,

On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, David Grothe wrote:
> [snip]
> Any chance that your changes will make it into a future "official" version of
gdb?

I wanted to make a patch for current snapshot of gdb. But it already
includes different semantics for add-symbol-file at address -1.
I'll look into this problem make a patch for current snapshot of gdb.

I'll inform you when I post a patch to gdb-patches mailing list.

--------------

Unfortunately, I can't be of much more help than that.  I believe it is
possible to do kgdb debugging on modules in 2.3.  I don't know about 2.2,
though.  You might want to ask Amit Kale, who seems to be a gdb expert,
or David Grothe, who is the maintainer of the kgdb patch, what the status
of debugging modules with kgdb is.

Scott

-- 
Scott Foehner                   SGI
sfoehner@xxxxxxxxxxxx           Computer Systems Business Unit
650-933-3473                    Core OS

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>