kksymoops

kksymoops

[Jeff Garzik]

Rusty,

What is the status of kksymoops?

I realize that you have a full plate, but [for the short time it existed 
in mainline] this was a incredibly useful feature for end users 
providing bug reports to me (and others).

I'm _not_ asking "when", just wondering what the plan is to resuscitate 
kksymoops.

	Jeff

Re: kksymoops

[Jeff Garzik]

Jeff Garzik wrote:

> Rusty,
>
> What is the status of kksymoops?



LOL -- look at me eat my words.

I see it's now in Linus's tree -- thanks much!

	Jeff

Re: kksymoops

[Rusty Russell]

In message <3DD9AB88.4000102@pobox.com> you write:
> I'm _not_ asking "when", just wondering what the plan is to resuscitate 
> kksymoops.

Looks like someone pushed my patch.  Erm, OK, wonder if it works on
x86? 8)

My mental TODO list looked something like this:
1) Drop the optimization which checks against addr between _stext and
   _etext, as this skips __init functions on most archs.
2) Only put in the symbols for functions (currently CONFIG_KALLSYMS=y
   adds 400k on my laptop: ouch!).
3) Keith asked me to rename it, so as not to get confused with the
   previous patches and kgdb support).  I guess it's too late for this
   one.
4) Use a simple scheme like the mini-oopser did to reduce the symbol
   table size furthur (I got it down to 70k IIRC).
5) See if Kai prefers the compile step inside the Makefile rather than
   in the script.
6) It'd be nice if CONFIG_KALLSYMS=m worked.

If someone wants to champion any or all of these, be my guest, there's
plenty to go around 8)

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.

Re: kksymoops

[Kevin Brosius]

> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
> > Rusty,
> >
> > What is the status of kksymoops?
> 
> 
> 
> LOL -- look at me eat my words.
> 
> I see it's now in Linus's tree -- thanks much!
> 

Thanks guys! (I figured I'd give him a day or two before pinging Rusty
directly.)  This'll help chase some driver problems on the USB side.

-- 
Kevin

Re: kksymoops

[Kai Germaschewski]

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Rusty Russell wrote:

> In message <3DD9AB88.4000102@pobox.com> you write:
> > I'm _not_ asking "when", just wondering what the plan is to resuscitate 
> > kksymoops.
> 
> Looks like someone pushed my patch.  Erm, OK, wonder if it works on
> x86? 8)

I think Linus himself did that ;)

> My mental TODO list looked something like this:
> 1) Drop the optimization which checks against addr between _stext and
>    _etext, as this skips __init functions on most archs.

Well, this was put in to avoid all kind of garbage in the traces, so it 
shouldn't just go without replacement. Probably one could even get it 
correct now, using ->module_init() and ->module_core() (just set them for 
the core kernel as well).

> 2) Only put in the symbols for functions (currently CONFIG_KALLSYMS=y
>    adds 400k on my laptop: ouch!).

I'm not to sure about this, I sometimes find it useful to have variables 
on the stack identified correctly.

> 3) Keith asked me to rename it, so as not to get confused with the
>    previous patches and kgdb support).  I guess it's too late for this
>    one.

Nothing wrong with a follow-up patch, is it?

> 5) See if Kai prefers the compile step inside the Makefile rather than
>    in the script.

I'll actually have to look into this. The script is probably fine.

> 6) It'd be nice if CONFIG_KALLSYMS=m worked.

Shouldn't be too hard.

Well, I know talk is cheap. I'll try to find some time to actually look
into some of these issues and come up with patches.

--Kai