[Crash-utility] [PATCHv2 00/11] Implement percpu handling for crash

[Dave Anderson]

----- Original Message -----
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 15:37:42 -0400 (EDT)
> Dave Anderson <anderson at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > Hi Dave,
> > > 
> > > I'm sorry for the last submission. It seems I forgot to refresh the
> > > patches, so it was completely bogus. Should be fixed now. I'm also
> > > attaching my changes as one big patch to this message.
> > > 
> > > Petr Tesarik
> > 
> > Hi Petr,
> 
> Hi Dave,
> 
> > I've reviewed the code changes, and have been beating on the
> > patch, and I can't get it break.  Really nice work...
> > 
> >[...]
> > 
> > I'd change it to this:
> >   crash> help p
> >   
> >   NAME
> >     p - print the value of an expression
> >   
> >   SYNOPSIS
> >     p [-x|-d][-u] [expression | symbol[:cpuspec]]
> 
> Yes! It shows that cpuspec cannot be specified for arbitrary
> expressions. In fact, I thought about implementing that feature,
> but I doubt I could get it to work without patching gdb itself.
> 
> >[...]
> > And maybe a minor indenting change for the cpu/address values,
> > from this:
> >   struct desc_ptr {
> >   crash> struct desc_ptr b0c8:1,3
> >     [1]: ffff88021e24b0c8
> >   struct desc_ptr {
> >[...]
> 
> > to this:
> >   
> >   crash> struct desc_ptr b0c8:1,3
> >   [1]: ffff88021e24b0c8
> >   struct desc_ptr {
> 
> I copied this code verbatim from the "p" command, so the extra spaces
> are forgotten rather than intended.
> 
> >[...]
> > But other than that, it looks good to go.  Do you have anything
> > more to add?
> 
> No, it looks good now. Should I refresh the patch set, or can you
> make the cosmetic changes in your tree yourself?

No, I'll take it from here -- consider it queued for crash-7.0.3.

And thanks again for all your work on this, it's really a significant
enhancement.

Dave