Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 18:41:09 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: roland@topspin.com, agl@us.ibm.com, mlxk@mellanox.co.il,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stack dumps, CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER and i386 (was Re: sysrq shows
 impossible call stack)
Message-Id: <20040420184109.6876b3d9.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040420183915.4eee560c.akpm@osdl.org>
References: <408545AA.6030807@mellanox.co.il>
	<52ekqizkd2.fsf@topspin.com>
	<40855F95.7080003@mellanox.co.il>
	<5265buzgfn.fsf_-_@topspin.com>
	<1082492730.716.76.camel@agtpad>
	<52llkqw5me.fsf@topspin.com>
	<20040420183915.4eee560c.akpm@osdl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1007
Lines: 24

Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
>
> Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com> wrote:
>  >
>  >     Adam> This problem was annoying me a few months ago so I coded up
>  >     Adam> a stack trace patch that actually uses the frame pointer.
>  >     Adam> It is currently maintained in -mjb but I have pasted below.
>  >     Adam> Hope this helps.
>  > 
>  > Thanks, that looks really useful.  What is the chance of this moving
>  > from -mjb to mainline?
> 
>  Good, but it needs to be updated to do the right thing with 4k stacks when
>  called from interrupt context.

Also, I'd like to be convinced that it does the right thing across assembly
code which doesn't set up a correct frame pointer, such as down().

I assume it will simply skip that frame altogether?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/