>>>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:19:49 -0700, Bob Montgomery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> said:
Bob> You might trust the unwinder, and that *might* be a reason to lop off
Bob> the top two (show regs and show stack), but I still want to see what
Bob> kernel handler was used, and it's still reassuring to be able to check
Bob> at show_stack to verify that bsp < sp to eliminate stack overflow as
Bob> the source of either the problem, or the problem with the unwinding that
Bob> follows.
That's true.
Bob> I'm assuming in my example, that not printing until the interruption
Bob> frame would eliminate what is shown below, and I would like to keep
Bob> that:
Bob> [<a000000100036b50>] die+0x150/0x280
Bob> sp=e0000001200dfb40 bsp=e0000001200d8f20
Bob> [<a000000100036cc0>] die_if_kernel+0x40/0x60
Bob> sp=e0000001200dfb40 bsp=e0000001200d8ef0
Bob> [<a0000001000378d0>] ia64_fault+0x150/0xac0
Bob> sp=e0000001200dfb40 bsp=e0000001200d8ea8
Bob> [<a00000010000ad20>] ia64_leave_kernel+0x0/0x260
Bob> sp=e0000001200dfc40 bsp=e0000001200d8ea8
Bob> and not just see the stack top out at
Bob> [<a0000002000689d0>] buncho_going_to_regnat+0x50/0xa0 [buncho]
Bob> sp=e0000001200dfe10 bsp=e0000001200d8e80
Bob> ...
Bob> where the error occurred.
No, other arches start past the interrupt frame, i.e., you'd get the
latter output.
Stack-corruption is an important concern, I agree. That's the only
reason I haven't gotten rid of the "sp" and "bsp" printing.
--david
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
