From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Feb 23 9:26:39 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from marlborough.cnchost.com (marlborough.concentric.net [207.155.248.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2145E37B402; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 09:26:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from bitblocks.com (adsl-209-204-185-216.sonic.net [209.204.185.216]) by marlborough.cnchost.com id MAA07523; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 12:26:34 -0500 (EST) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.14] Message-ID: <200202231726.MAA07523@marlborough.cnchost.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: Julian Elischer , Michael Smith , "George V. Neville-Neil" , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel Debugging over the Ethernet? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:56:27 PST." <3C756D0B.57E25B0@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 09:26:33 -0800 From: Bakul Shah Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Without TCP, you have to implement your own version of > retry and ack (equivalent to negotiating a window size > of 1), and so you have to redo what's already there. Would be nice to have a reliable channel but in our experience not having this was not a big deal. The gdb serial protocol is fairly resilient. > The other issue with TCP is that you can set up specific > flows in the company firewall, and also permit SSLeay > based tunnel encapsulation from outside via an intermediate > machine. This isn't really required for off-site debugging, > but it gives another option. You are better off ssh-ing into a machine on the same net and running gdb there. For me the biggest reason for not using any IP was to minimize any perturbation due to the debugger. The fact that we have to steal mbufs is bad enough. -- bakul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message