Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH][2/3] Update CVS KGDB's have kgdb_{schedule,process}_breakpoint

[Amit S. Kale]

On Thursday 04 Mar 2004 5:50 am, George Anzinger wrote:
> Amit S. Kale wrote:
> > On Wednesday 03 Mar 2004 2:49 am, George Anzinger wrote:
> >>Amit S. Kale wrote:
> >>>On Friday 27 Feb 2004 4:49 am, George Anzinger wrote:
> >>>>Amit S. Kale wrote:
> >>>>>On Thursday 26 Feb 2004 3:13 am, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>>>>>The following adds, and then makes use of kgdb_process_breakpoint /
> >>>>>>kgdb_schedule_breakpoint.  Using it i kgdb_8250.c isn't strictly
> >>>>>>needed, but it isn't wrong either.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>That makes 8250 response it a _bit_ slower. A user will notice when
> >>>>> kgdb doesn't respond within a millisecond of pressing Ctrl+C :-)
> >>>>
> >>>>Hm...  I have been wondering if it might not be a good idea to put some
> >>>>comments to the user at or around the breakpoint.  Possibly we might
> >>>> want to tell the user about where the info files are or some such. 
> >>>> This would then come up on his screen when the source code at the
> >>>> breakpoint is displayed.
> >>>
> >>>Err, well, I don't seem to understand this.
> >>>
> >>>Do you mean we print a (gdb) console message that indicates something
> >>>about a breakpoint? If we do that, there has to be a way to turn it off.
> >>>I have a (rather bad) habit of stepping through kernel code :-)
> >>
> >>No that is not what I mean.  I don't want to try to send messages to the
> >>gdb console (it is not supported by gdb at this time).  Rather, the hard
> >>coded breakpoint instruction that we use to get to the the stub when the
> >>user enters a ^C is in a particular bit of source code.  Most gdb front
> >>ends display this bit of source centered on the breakpoint instruction.
> >>What I am asking about is puting something useful here from the user
> >> point of view.  For example we might have this:
> >>
> >>/*
> >>  * This is the KGDB control C break point.  For additional info on KGDB
> >>options * and suggested macros see .../Documentation/kgdb/* in your
> >> kernel tree. * KGDB version XX.YY
> >>  */
> >>	BREAKPOINT;
> >>
> >>--------------------------------------
> >
> > This is definitely a good point.
> >
> > We may also report the exact location where kernel was running when
> > Ctrl+C came in. We have pt_regs available in do_IRQ. We can pass that to
> > process breakpoint function. The process breakpoint function can then
> > straight call handle_exception passing it pt_regs instead of going
> > through breakpoint. That will save some stack also.
>
> Uh, I would think that "bt" should cover this.  Why muddy the waters with
> other stuff.  I think the user should see exactly where he is going to go
> on the continue.  One really good reason for this is that this is the

User _will_ see the exact context where he is going to continue. If we type 
$pc=foo \n continue pc will be changed and will run in the same register 
values where the serial irq occured.


> context any
>
> p fun()

p fun() will push arguments on stack over the place where irq occured, which 
is exactly how it''ll run.

-Amit

>
> will run in.
>
> ~

-
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/