Re: BitKeeper repo for KGDB

[Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 06:44:02PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > Hello everybody.  Since I've been talking with George off-list about
> > > > trying to merge the various versions of KGDB around, and I just read the
> > > > thread between Andy and Jim about conflicting on KGDB work, I've put up
> > > > a BitKeeper repository[1] to try and coordinate things.
> > > > 
> > > > What's in there right now is Amit's kgdb 2.1.0, without the ethernet
> > > > patch.   There's also all of the changes for PPC and for generic stuffs
> > > > that I've been doing of late.
> > > > 
> > > > What I'll be doing shortly (this afternoon even) is to change from a
> > > > struct of function pointers, for the arch specific functions, into a set
> > > > of provided, weak, variants and then allow arches to override as needed.
> > > > 
> > > > What I'd like is for someone to move the ethernet bits from the -mm tree
> > > > into here, and for people to merge the fixes / enhancements that're in
> > > > their per-arch stubs in the -mm tree into the split design that Amit's
> > > > version has.
> > > > 
> > > > Comments? Screams? Patches? :)
> > > 
> > > This one. It compiles. It needs -netpoll. It probably does not work.
> > 
> > Er, what's this against?  I don't have drivers/net/kgdb_eth.c in my repo
> > right now (nor the -netpoll patch, but I'll happily take a patch to add
> > the kgdb over enet stub and -netpoll).
> 
> It's against 2.6 + -netpoll + Amit's patch.

But doesn't -mm have a kgdb over enet driver that does work?  It's just
not been ported to Amit's bits, right?

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/