On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 08:46:20AM -0700, George Anzinger wrote: > Tom Rini wrote: > >On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 08:42:04PM -0700, Piet Delaney wrote: > > > > > >>Ton, George, Amit, et. al: > >> > >>If CONFIG_KGDB isn't defined, the kernel should be exactly the > >>same as when kgdb isn't integrated. So shouldn't we should add > >>#ifdef CONFIG_KGDB in the traps.c code where the traps are > >>initialized and panic notify is registered. > > > > > >No, because that makes the code look way too ugly. If there's no harm > >in doing something if kgdb is or isn't compiled in, we want to do it, > >such as in this case. > > > For what its worth, I a) agree with Piet, and b) disagree with active init > of the traps. In the last version of kgdb I built I coded a static init of > the trap notify. The value used was conditionally defined in a kgdb header > file thus resulting in clean trap.c code. > > This enabled kgdb to come up earlier than the running of the init code > (other things may be required...)
The point of early_trap_init()s (more than i386 has it, with the KGDB patches) is that we can always call that as soon as we can. It's either a non-impact (!KGDB, etc) or helpful (KGDB). -- Tom Rini ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Kgdb-bugreport mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kgdb-bugreport
