Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263301AbUDUXtR (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2004 19:49:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263308AbUDUXtQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2004 19:49:16 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:14043 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263301AbUDUXtP (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2004 19:49:15 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 16:50:59 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Adam Litke Cc: roland@topspin.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: <20040421165059.4579e64d.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1082590136.715.190.camel@agtpad> 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> <20040420184109.6876b3d9.akpm@osdl.org> <1082590136.715.190.camel@agtpad> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1539 Lines: 37 Adam Litke wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-04-20 at 18:41, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > Roland Dreier 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. > > The show_trace() for the CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER case will now be called > the same way as the existing code. I still don't see any code in there to handle the transition from the interrupt stack page to the non-interrupt stack page in the 4k-stacks case? > This brings up a question though. > It doesn't appear to me that anyone is actually calling > show_trace_task() yet. Am I missing something or should we change all > the callers of show_trace() to use show_trace_task()? You're right - we've killed off all of its callers. Neat. I shall administer the coup de grace. - 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/