AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<David.Olien@lsi.com>,<rendell.fong@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	6C678488C5CEE74F813A4D1948FD2DC7B7BF8896@cosmail02.lsi.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:59:19 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: "Olien, David" <David.Olien@lsi.com>
Cc: Rendell Fong <rendell.fong@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: kgdb io device
Message-ID: <20100329165919.3a0cc28b@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6C678488C5CEE74F813A4D1948FD2DC7B7BF8896@cosmail02.lsi.com>
References: <6C678488C5CEE74F813A4D1948FD2DC7B7BF8896@cosmail02.lsi.com>
Organization: LSI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:24:43 -0600 "Olien, David" <David.Olien@lsi.com>
wrote:

> Hi Andy
> 
> Another question.
> 
> We re-arranged my task list to do the kgdb support first.  I see that
> kdgb support is configured into the tuxrx  debug kernel.  What are
> you using for the kdgb io device?  Are you using serial console?  The
> only other possibility might be Ethernet.
> 
> The  wiki page
> 
> http://wiki.onstor.net/wiki/TuxStor:Howto_kgdb_to_TXRX/FP
> 
> talks about using rcon to run kdgb.  But rcon is not yet supported,
> and you probably never will support it.

Actually, and sadly, rcon is supported, and this was the way that
certain people insisted it be implemented.  But it is a pain.
I'll cc Rendell on this because he was the one that got it all working
way back when. Possibly using the second serial port as the IO device is
also possible.

> For the jaguar release (which if I remember will be before ORION, and
> will NOT use virtual machines to separate ssc functionality from fp
> and txrx?) the only things that make sense would be serial console or
> Ethernet?

That's all that ever made sense to me, but I was alone in the forest.
One of those people is coming around to recognizing that there is going
to be a large paradigmn change from EEE days, so possibly we can
abandon the rcon thing.  Or use the mgmtbus network device, which might
not be time/resource possible.

> For ORION, where we have virtual machines that are separating some of
> these functionalities, if the ssc is in it's own VM, then something
> LIKE rcon might be useful again?  Probably won't go with the rcon per
> processor.  Instead, just have some network-like port that can talk
> from ssc virtual machine to the others, and could support debugging
> operations.  But this is still a while from now?
> 
> dave
> 
> 
