----- Original Message ----- > On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 12:43:01 -0400 > Dave Anderson <anderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Petr, > > > > Are the sources different the openSUSE patches? > > Dave > > I've just cheked it, and they haven't changed. So, we're talking about > crash-gdb-*.patch files from: > > https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Kernel:kdump/crash Correct -- Michel indirectly referenced this tree page which appears to have the same stuff: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:PowerPC/crash > I took these patches directly from our gdb package, which means they > should appear in a future gdb release, and then we'll get them for free > by upgrading the embedded gdb in crash. And thanks for that -- I appreciate that very much... > > Please also see my comments below. > > > > Petr, Michel, et al, > > > > Hi Dave et al., > > > > FWIW the upcoming SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 release will ship a > > crash utility that works on ppc64le, and I think IBM has already tested > > it successfully. I'll see how I can make the latest sources available on > > a public site. > > > > Petr Tesarik > > > > > I'm currently working on adding ppc64le support for the next upstream > > > crash release. I'm working from a Fedora bugzilla filed by Michel Normand, > > > where he that applied the "crash-gdb-7.6.series" set of patches from the openSUSE > > > distribution. Thanks Michel for doing the initial legwork using the Fedora > > > tree. > > > > > > For the upstream crash utility repo, I do not want to carry the set of 9 patches > > > individually, but similar to the singular gdb-7.6.patch, I plan to concatenate > > > them into a singular gdb-7.6-ppc64le-support.patch. > > Why? AFAICS it will only make rebasing to a different gdb version harder. Why? It would just work automatically because the ppc64le patch wouldn't get applied by the Makefile when the gdb version is updated. > > > Ideally the contents of the 9 patch files could be added to the gdb-7.6.patch, > > > and I may do that in the future. > > I feel quite the opposite. The existing gdb-7.6.patch, which is always > such a pain to port when the gdb version changes, should be split up > into individual logical changes, and applied much like my 9 patches. Actually I never felt that way. Rebasing is a pain regardless whether the patches in the gdb-7.6.patch are split out or not. Each patch-within-the-patch has to be checked individually regardless whether it's a separate file or not. The majority of the individual gdb-x.y.patch patches need to be forward-ported to do the "crash merge" operation, with only a handful of them appearing in the rebased gdb. And given that the ppc64le series should all appear in the next gdb rebase, I will keep them in the separate file. > That way I can use quilt (http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/quilt) to > update the patch series when necesssary. I definitely find it easier to > update a number of smaller patches one by one than trying to update one > huge patch. Yeah but it's fairly rare that the embedded gdb gets patched, so it shouldn't be a problem. This is a fairly unique scenario, i.e., where it's not really introducing support for a brand new architecture. And any ppc64le-specific modifications can easily be appended to the new patch file. Each of the 9 patches (and their commit header info) are clearly indicated in the concatenation. > Just my two eurocents, Point taken. But I just don't want to clutter the upstream sources with a bunch of patch files. When the next gdb rebase happens, they all go away like a bad dream. Dave -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
