Re: [Qemu-devel] Planning for the 0.11.0 release

[Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>]

Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Something went wrong during transmission, and I missed that. Just sent
> out those two as well.
>   

Thanks, it's now all in staging.

> That's nothing those patches changes (it's our current and only
> debugging model for SMP until gdb provides a complete solution).
>   

It Paul agrees, I'll pull it.  But my understanding from the previous 
threads and posts was that Paul did not want to implement vCont even as 
a stop-gap and that he preferred to fix gdb properly.

> The recent discussion went around how to deal with some other gdb
> limitation: debugging targets that run in x86's 16/32 bit mode vs. the
> target arch being advertised as 64 bit. Existing qemu code doesn't work
> with existing gdb in this scenario, and the question was how to deal
> with it until gdb is improved.
>   

Right, that part I'm okay with.  But the vCont based gdb model presumes 
a unified address space which while usually true for kernel address 
spaces, isn't universally true and certainly not true when PC is in 
userspace.  That's what I understood to be the major objection to vCont.

>>  I'm not qualified to
>> appreciate the difference so I'm inclined to side with Paul.  Am I
>> missing something there?
>>     
>
> I interpreted [1] as that the rest is OK for Paul.
>   

Paul, can you clarify?

-- 
Regards,

Anthony Liguori