Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 08:02:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, Freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -current kernel still considered dangerous Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106060757230.16661-100000@beppo.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <20010606074352.B96129@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 07:36:48AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Unlike Solaris, modules are not essential to run FreeBSD. I think debugging > > this by fixing 'debugging modules' is at best a 3rd order priority. > > I thought many of the device driver folks perfer to develop via modules. > How do they debug things? Printf() is it? I have to admit that I've almost never used a source level debugger for kernel debugging- except for WindowsNT. I'll also freely admit that there are others who are much happier and better at using the tools for FreeBSD for this- I'm not as I *usually* find myself in the case where the gdb style debugger isn't helping. Printf && states, yes. Modules are good. I desparately miss Solaris' kadb in *BSD. KADB is a machine level debugger- but has things like deferred breakpoints (for modules- you can set a breakpoint for a symbol in a module before the module is loaded). More importantly, there is an extremely tight coupling between the kernel && kadb, and, more importantly, kadb and boot or prom services, so that breakpoints && printfs don't depend on sane kernel driver state. -matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0106060757230.16661-100000>