This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch v3 16/16] btrace, x86: restrict to Atom
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, markus dot t dot metzger at gmail dot com
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 21:24:08 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [patch v3 16/16] btrace, x86: restrict to Atom
- References: <1344949171-9545-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <1344949171-9545-17-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <201208141327.q7EDR7TC017727@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B2307ACF558@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B2307AEDD71@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <201209280239.q8S2ddal001019@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B2307AF196B@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
> From: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 06:51:24 +0000
>
> > But I still think putting CPU model specific checks anywhere in GDB is
> > wrong. If there are broken kernels out there, figure out a way to
> > detect them.
>
> The cpuid check is simple and reliable. Anything else will be more
> complicated and also less straight-forward to understand.
But what if btrace support shows up for other CPUs, or if a next
generation Atom shows up that has a different cpuid?