Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Jul 2003 02:57:18 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: KDB in the mainstream 2.4.x kernels? |
| |
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 07:31:08PM -0500, linas@austin.ibm.com wrote: > > One argument i have against it: KDB is incredibly ugly code. > > Before it could be even considered for merging it would need quite a lot > > of cleanup. > > What in particular? I just looked at kdb/kdbmain.c and kdb/kdb_bt.c > and it looks fine to me; fairly minimal even. I don't know about > arch-specific code. Is there a particular file you're complaining about?
Check the kdbsupport.c code too.
All the code together for the i386 backtracer is approaching 1000 LOC and it's quite ugly.
> Dedicating a partition that is unformated, and whose sole purpose > in life is to record a dump -- that is a viable option, at least on > servers, where high uptime is more important, and storage is cheap.
Typically you don't need a dedicated partition, you can dump on swap. netdump does also dump over the network. This may be the safer choice when you don't trust your block subsystem after crashes.
-Andi
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |