Date: Thu, 07 Mar 1996 08:24:56 -0600 From: "Eric L. Hernes" <erich@lodgenet.com> To: Greg Lehey <lehey.pad@sni.de> Cc: davidg@Root.COM, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG (Hackers; FreeBSD) Subject: Re: using ddb to debug a double-panic? Message-ID: <199603071424.IAA16678@jake.lodgenet.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Mar 1996 11:01:51 %2B0700." <199603071005.LAA20629@nixpbe.pdb.sni.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've been thinking about it too, but for now it's quite useable and that's the important thing. > > I've been thinking about improving ddb. About 4 years ago, I wrote a > similar kernel debugger for BSD/386, and was thinking of incorporating > some of its features into ddb. One of the things it could do was > exactly this kind of stack trace (well, it supplied other information > as well). I won't get round to doing it until May, though. > > Does anybody else have ideas about improving ddb? > yea, SCO's kernel debugger has a few more advanced features that I kind of like, that probably wouldn't be too hard to implement: a readline type history, macros and user-defined functions, casting and structure dumping (maybe done through macros), watchpoints (do these work in ddb?), the single step execution holds your hand a bit better, and a couple others. I'd also like to be able to load in a new symbol table, such as when an lkm is loaded. Now it's only possible to debug loaded lkms, by running nm on the module_mod output from the modload, and using the addresses from that. I realize that this opens a can of worms wrt to multiple lkms and unloading, but usually you've gotta reboot before that'd kill you anyhow :). Maybe there's a better way to do this too. > Greg > > eric. -- erich@lodgenet.com erich@rrnet.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603071424.IAA16678>