From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:20:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:20:21 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:29711 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:20:14 -0500 Message-ID: <3CA52E8F.C8D0E5F8@zip.com.au> Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 19:18:39 -0800 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.19-pre4 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Jackson CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [QUESTION] which kernel debugger is "best"? In-Reply-To: <010b01c1d794$07c7c9b0$7e0aa8c0@bridge> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeremy Jackson wrote: > > What are people using? kgdb. Tried kdb and (sorry, Keith), it's not in the same league. Not by miles. > neither kdb or kgdb appear to support > 2.5.7 (kdb does 2.5.5)... General answer to this is to go for a foray in http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/ Which turns up http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/2.5/2.5.7/kgdb.patch > or do real men debug with prink() ? I have done it both ways, extensively, for long periods. The printk method is comically inefficient. The amount of transparency whch kgdb gives to kernel internals is extraordinary. -