From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Wed Jul 20 19:20:40 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB992B9FEE5 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 19:20:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sbruno@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.ignoranthack.me (ignoranthack.me [199.102.79.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C55611AF for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 19:20:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sbruno@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.0.6] (67-0-51-151.albq.qwest.net [67.0.51.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: sbruno@ignoranthack.me) by mail.ignoranthack.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 317ED1928BE for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 19:20:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Retiring in-tree GDB To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org References: <2678091.es0AGJQ0Ou@ralph.baldwin.cx> <4450836.nX37FfBzNy@ralph.baldwin.cx> From: Sean Bruno Message-ID: <068a0167-1d5d-a437-60e7-b74e407060a2@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 13:20:34 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4450836.nX37FfBzNy@ralph.baldwin.cx> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aI7mpvAB0X4IPKEEpRF875lvlwuTK733L" X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 19:20:40 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --aI7mpvAB0X4IPKEEpRF875lvlwuTK733L Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="606I5uSIhQo9dBDFkknnjGN21PWU6vf6w" From: Sean Bruno To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Message-ID: <068a0167-1d5d-a437-60e7-b74e407060a2@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Retiring in-tree GDB References: <2678091.es0AGJQ0Ou@ralph.baldwin.cx> <4450836.nX37FfBzNy@ralph.baldwin.cx> In-Reply-To: <4450836.nX37FfBzNy@ralph.baldwin.cx> --606I5uSIhQo9dBDFkknnjGN21PWU6vf6w Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 07/20/16 13:00, John Baldwin wrote: > On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 01:36:28 PM John Baldwin wrote: >> When this topic was last raised (by Warner I believe), the primary obj= ection >> (certainly my main one) was that the in-tree kgdb was the only kernel = debugger >> available. kgdb is now available via the devel/gdb port in ports (and= as of >> last week was enabled by default, so 'pkg install gdb' will get you a = kgdb >> binary). The kgdb in ports is in general superior to the one in the b= ase >> system. It is a cross debugger by default (and with my pending patche= s to >> libkvm it even supports cross debugging of vmcores). >> >> There are some issues still with devel/gdb: namely it does not current= ly >> support some of the platforms supported by our in tree gdb such as arm= and >> mips. For these platforms I think the in-tree gdb will need to remain= until >> there is a suitable alternative. >> >> However, I would like to propose that we retire the in-tree GDB for so= me of >> our platforms (namely x86) for 11. In particular, I think we should d= efault >> to enabling lldb and disabling gdb for platforms that meet the followi= ng >> criteria: >> >> 1) devel/gdb works including thread and kgdb support >> 2) lldb works >> >> We could perhaps be more aggressive and handle lldb and gdb toggles >> independently, but I think we want to ship some sort of userland debug= ger >> out of the box on all of our platforms. The question I think might be= if >> we end up with platforms where 1) is true but 2) is not (such as power= pc). >> >> I believe that these conditions are only true for x86 currently. >> >> Comments? >=20 > I believe I've fixed the one last thing that was depending on /usr/bin/= gdb > (crashinfo) to use devel/gdb if it is present. I'd either like to disa= ble > the base gdb on amd64 in the next week or so on HEAD, or perhaps if peo= ple are > really gutsy, disable it for all platforms on HEAD. We still don't hav= e kgdb > in ports for non-x86 (though for ppc at least kgdb in ports and base is= > equally dysfunctional). >=20 > However, to start with: >=20 > 1) Does anyone have a reason to keep /usr/bin/gdb on amd64? >=20 > 2) Does anyone have a reason to keep /usr/bin/gdb on !amd64? >=20 I don't have an immediate use case in the mips/mips64 case. Should ports "just work" here or do I need some kind of "cross gdb"? sean --606I5uSIhQo9dBDFkknnjGN21PWU6vf6w-- --aI7mpvAB0X4IPKEEpRF875lvlwuTK733L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJXj88DXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRCQUFENDYzMkU3MTIxREU4RDIwOTk3REQx MjAxRUZDQTFFNzI3RTY0AAoJEBIB78oecn5keqwIAKjBGgG6sWBUabHYuWd/pW0V B2mMSQpGIkwHfhoCTzAI4YJ2pxpOZDvmCcJ1Lan0FC7YiBuxzJad3RKzVgsFVx8M 12TOC3dEuqhgcrr7fa73ZbSl+HpSca+1qRnBzNZ9pq9X0PaNh1o/G4pPm20pWvWD I7x/guxZpHQBI1w4VgVgNCCOYqFJXo7RkZejlvGY8Bd+FoXa2bdxiQZr9IDVTku7 54obHSZabDce+BPd6IbIJDT1VSgEmAqOHCtwwPvfcCiN9Lftv3adEIve/W1Uhay2 fPRGupKrQ8b50KIFfXUJu30lV5lPoK6njQ6d60lRBs2YKUSI+d5xsQybH2nGB24= =DUr8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aI7mpvAB0X4IPKEEpRF875lvlwuTK733L--