Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 10:34:49 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Michael Smith <msmith@freebsd.org>, "George V. Neville-Neil" <gnn@neville-neil.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel Debugging over the Ethernet? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202231022490.79221-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200202231726.MAA07523@marlborough.cnchost.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, Bakul Shah wrote: > > Without TCP, you have to implement your own version of > > retry and ack (equivalent to negotiating a window size > > of 1), and so you have to redo what's already there. > > Would be nice to have a reliable channel but in our > experience not having this was not a big deal. The gdb > serial protocol is fairly resilient. > > > The other issue with TCP is that you can set up specific > > flows in the company firewall, and also permit SSLeay > > based tunnel encapsulation from outside via an intermediate > > machine. This isn't really required for off-site debugging, > > but it gives another option. > > You are better off ssh-ing into a machine on the same net and > running gdb there. > > For me the biggest reason for not using any IP was to > minimize any perturbation due to the debugger. The fact that > we have to steal mbufs is bad enough. I agree, especially when we will have locking etc for the mbuf queues. It's a pitty we can't intercept the mbuf allocate routines.. then we could keep a couple for ourself :-) > > -- bakul > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0202231022490.79221-100000>