Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 12:37:42 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> Cc: alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, mp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gdb breaks world Message-ID: <20020630123742.C71518@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <15647.23464.742291.557283@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>; from gallatin@cs.duke.edu on Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 03:27:36PM -0400 References: <15646.25960.889781.783159@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20020629193514.A51177@dragon.nuxi.com> <15646.28621.258621.69134@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20020629214620.A56685@dragon.nuxi.com> <15647.23464.742291.557283@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 03:27:36PM -0400, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> What was the rationale for how the x86 kvm-fbsd.c was brought forward
> and the alpha kvm-fbsd.c was left behind?
I begged people to try the gdb52 port, but it turns out that there wasn't
Alpha kgdb support -- only i386 support. At the point I realized
everything we needed wasn't part of the gdb52 port was already 1/2 into
the import.
> Was it intended that other platforms add support via #ifdef's to
> kvm-fbsd.c, or was it just an oversight and I should just bring the
> existing alpha kvm-fbsd.c forward?
IMO we keep doing things too differently between our arches. I would
like to see us try to do the same thing as much as possible. I thought
maybe we could share a single kvm-fbsd.c file; but after looking at it
when I made that commit I guess not. BUT I do think we can share some
things across all arches (maybe we add a few #defines to arch headers to
help). So I expect there will need to be a kvm-fbsd-{ARCH}.c file added
with just a _few_ things in it.
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?20020630123742.C71518>