RE: symbolic debug of loadable modules with kgdb light

Caz Yokoyama
2009-04-26T00:39:01Z

Correction
kgdb light expects BREAK and then ^C.
---------
kgdb light expects BREAK and then g.
-caz

-----Original Message-----
From: Caz Yokoyama [mailto:caz@caztech.com]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 9:48 AM
To: 'tromey@redhat.com'
Cc: 'Joel Brobecker'; 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org'
Subject: RE: symbolic debug of loadable modules with kgdb light

Hello Tom,
Thank you for pay attention for my patch.
Have you read following discussion about this? There are 2 points my patch
add to, 1) symbolic debug of loadable modules with kgdb light, 2) break-in
by ^C remotely. For 1), Ruby support is integrating into gdb. By using that,
it access /proc file system and incorporate a symbol table for a loadable
module. Someone told me approach by Ruby is more attractive. So, my
understanding of this is my modification is useless because of Ruby support.
BTW, I had kept my modification against cvs source of gdb instead of 6.8.

For 2), gdb emits BREAK or ^C depending when ^C is typed. On the other hand,
kgdb light expects BREAK and then ^C. I introduce debugkernel. When
debugkernel is true, BREAK and then ^C is emitted to target. Someone said
more elegant scheme is needed instead of debugkernel. So, I lost interest.
BTW, this is all of my code and less than 10 lines of code modification.
-caz

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Tromey [mailto:tromey@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 8:32 AM
To: Caz Yokoyama
Cc: 'Joel Brobecker'; gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: symbolic debug of loadable modules with kgdb light

>>>>> "Caz" == Caz Yokoyama <cazyokoyama@gmail.com> writes:

Caz> I have attached the patch against gdb-6.8.

Thanks.

Caz> - This patch is based on
Caz> http://kgdb.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/kgdb/gdb/. I removed
Caz> garbage as mush as possible. But it still has the code which I
Caz> don't know what it is. I don't remove copyright notice which is
Caz> there.

Do you have copyright assignment papers on file with the FSF? If not,
let me know and I can get you started on the process. This is a
requirement for getting any code into gdb.

Did you write this entire patch yourself? I just want to make sure.
If not, we'll need to get papers from any contributor who wrote more
than 10 lines of code in the patch.

Caz> - I haven't run testsuite because I could not find how to do that while
I
Caz> run make in testsuite directory.

"make check". You need dejagnu installed. And you actually have to
run a baseline check without your patch applied, then compare the
results.

Caz> - I believe that the code follows coding standard. Let me know if
Caz> not.

I noticed a number of formatting nits. These are no big deal.

More importantly, the patch makes a bunch of apparently
kernel-debugging-specific changes to generic code. I did not try to
read it very closely, but basically all of these will need to be cleaned
up. Some of the hunks we definitely do not want; e.g., moving
struct value into value.h.

Tom