On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 07:03:19PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for late reply but I am very busy now. > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 03:25:25PM -0400, Don Slutz wrote: > > On 10/16/13 09:49, Petr Tesarik wrote: > > >On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 12:02:51 -0400 > > >Don Slutz <dslutz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >>I have some code that allows this. See the following mail thread: > > >> > > >>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.xen.devel/174807 > > >> > > >>The questions are: > > >> > > >> 1. Does remote access have a specification? > > >> 2. Is it supported? > > >I have never even made it to work. But since there's now some new use > > >for it, I wouldn't object reviving the code. > > > > > Good. > > >> 3. Should the code be part of xen or crash? > > >I think it should be part of xen, because it needs the xen development > > >files, which would be a new dependency for the crash utility. Also, the > > >development cycle is more aligned with xen than crash. > > > > > >Just my two cents, > > >Petr T > > That is why I started with it in xen. Not sure where it will end up. > > I do not know protocol details but I think that it is worth checking > gdbsx tool from Xen (xen/tools/debugger/gdbsx) and gdb protocol spec > (you could expose GDB interface from QEMU so it could be useful in HVM > case). Maybe crash protocol is very similar or even identical with GDB > protocol because a large part of crash is GDB itself. Ugh... I was in a hurry and forgot about final statement. Sorry for that. So we could just use existing solutions if they are compatible with protocol used by crash. Daniel -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
