On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 02:30:11PM -0700, Piet Delaney wrote: > On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 12:17 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > 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. > > I agree that it's ugly, but until stock kernel wants to > do it this way I suspect that we will have an easier time > in being assimilated into the kernel.org repository by > being non-invasive.
Right, non-invasive like always doing something at one point and always doing something else at another. > We can likely avoid uglyness with cpp macros. And introduce unmaintainability. > Actually the ARM code has it 'right' and the call to early_trap_init() > within #if defined(CONFIG_KGDB).... #endif. Actually the ARM code is the odd case. iirc, they can always set all traps much earlier. But you can't just not have a trap_init(), iirc. Which is why they do thing they way they do. But, again iirc, on i386 you can't set every trap that early. -- 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
