On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:11:03 -0800 Phil Oester <kernel@linuxace.com> wrote:^^^^^^^ yup. I used kgdb continuously for 4-5 years until it broke. I don't think I ever used it much for "debugging" as such. I used it more for general observation of what's going on in the kernel. And for _confirmation_ of what's going on (ie: testing that the actual state matches the expected state). I'd end up doing my development with the assumption that kgdb was present. One example: rather than putting printks all over the place to ensure that the right thing was happening at the right time I'd instead add code like void foo(void) { } ... if (expr) foo(); then, when the testcase was up and running and in steady state, break in and put a breakpoint on foo(). Continue, wait for the breakpoint then go in and observe locals, globals, data structures, etc. It's hard to describe (and remember!). But the presence of the debugger as a development (not debugging) tool changes the way you do development a bit. --
| Hiten Pandya | Re: up? (emacs docbook xml ide) |
| David Newall | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! |
| Greg KH | Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Fixing the Kernel Janitors project |
| James Morris | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
