From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 30 09:41:58 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D4A16A4B3; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:41:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D1543FE9; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:41:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from 66.127.85.91 ([66.127.85.91]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h8UGfs0x077084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:41:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) From: Sam Leffler Organization: Errno Consulting To: Bruce Evans , "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:32:54 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <20030929083007.GA33083@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030930074500.GY45668@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030930204919.A4354@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20030930204919.A4354@gamplex.bde.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309300932.54682.sam@errno.com> cc: FreeBSD current users Subject: Re: Serial debug broken in recent -CURRENT? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:41:58 -0000 On Tuesday 30 September 2003 04:01 am, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > > On Tuesday, 30 September 2003 at 16:23:35 +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > > > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > > >> After building a new kernel, remote serial gdb no longer works. When > > >> I issue a 'continue' command, I lose control of the system, but it > > >> doesn't continue running. Has anybody else seen this? > > > > > > It works as well as it did a few months ago here. (Not very well > > > compared with ddb. E.g., calling a function is usually fatal.) > > > > Hmm, that's not what Sam or I are seeing. How old is your kernel? > > You *are* able to continue, right? Everything else works for me. > > I didn't test with my kernel; I tested with almost-current SMP and !SMP > kernels (amost-current = 217 lines of patches; my kernel = 96934 lines > of patches). They were about half an hour old when I tried it. I tested > little more than continuing from Debugger(). I didn't test using optional > foot shooting devices like acpi or modules. It reliably locks up for me when you break into a running system; set a breakpoint; and then continue. Machine is UP+HTT. Haven't tried other machines. Sam