On 09/06, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com> writes: > > > [...] > >> Therefore until you track some ugdb-specific software(*) > >> breakpoints ugdb does not need to support Z0 IMO. I guess ugdb > >> will never have to support these: thread-related(?) and tracepoint > >> ones. > > > Good! I thought ugdb should somehow handle this all "transparently" > > for gdb. I thought (I don't know why) that writing "int 3" from gdb > > side should be avoided in favour of some "better" method unknown to me. > > Please note that last year's gdbstub prototype used kernel uprobes as > an optional gdb breakpoint implementation (i.e., a backend for the Z > packets). When/if the lkml uprobes patches actually get merged, ugdb > should also use them.
Yes, agreed. Oleg.