Date: Fri, 13 Jan 95 11:00:18 GMT From: "gj%pcs.dec.com@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com" <garyj@rks32.pcs.dec.com> To: joerg_wunsch%uriah.sax.de@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com Cc: hackers%freebsd.org@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com Subject: Re: using procfs for debugging Message-ID: <m0rSjju-0005PIC@rks32.pcs.dec.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
J"org writes: > Hmm, i'm not eager to dig into problems where i don't have a clue > of:-) Actually, i've already looked and found that this is easy and > not easy. Easy since there are already hooks (SETUP_ARBITRARY_FRAME), > not easy since it looks that it's a designer's decision by now whether > an architecture does require two args to the `frame' command or if a > single arg will suffice. So if we'd use SETUP_ARBITRARY_FRAME the way > it's used by now, we'll prohibit the traditional way the frame command > used to work... > > Did i overlook something? Good tip. I'll think of something, even if I have to introduce a "dyadframe" command :) The biggest problem is getting a good dump to test it on. Should have it done this weekend. Gary J.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0rSjju-0005PIC>