On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 14:42 -0800, David Brownell wrote: > On Monday 30 November 2009, Zachary T Welch wrote: > > Registers a signal handler to catch SIGSEGV in order to display the > > stack where the program crashed. > > Is this for inside OpenOCD? If so, I'd rather just expect folk > to run inside GDB. Either they're running natively and should > never see SEGV ... or they should be able to fire up GDB to get > this data (and likely more). >
Not everyone wants to run GDB, and not all segfaults can be predicted. If you get one, it's better to have usable data than be required to reproduce what might be a Heisenbug. I have found this feature to be highly useful in the past, to the extent that I am not joking about wanting to implement a libbfd version of the module symbol lookup. This feature ensures that we can get reasonable stack traces from users, without them having to do any extra work. Less steps for crash reports is a Good Thing, I imagine Martha would say. Good built-in debugging facilities can be far superior to a debugger, and the Jim scripting language adds the fun twist where OpenOCD can expose these debug features directly to the user. You laugh now. The first time you use one of the stack dumps that it can produce, you will come to thank me for adding this feature. ;) Right now, I seem to find new ways to create segfaults on a regular basis, and this makes it much faster for me to see what has happened -- without ever running GDB. In summary, printf remains among the best debugging aids. This simply aims to offer some critical introspective intelligence in that vein, which benefits users and developers. Cheers, Zach _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
