>> This patch adds arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() for mips architecture.
> Don't forget your Signed-off-by
I'm sorry fot this.
>> +static void arch_dump_stack(void *info)
>> +{
>> + struct pt_regs *regs;
>> +
>> + regs = get_irq_regs();
>> +
>> + if(regs)
>> + show_regs(regs);
>> +
>> +
Hi John,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:11:39AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 22/10/2014 08:54, Eunbong Song wrote:
> >>> +void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(bool); +#define
> >>> arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
> >
> >> What is the purpose of this define ? is this
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 06:39:56AM +, Eunbong Song wrote:
> This patch adds arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() for mips architecture.
Don't forget your Signed-off-by
> +static void arch_dump_stack(void *info)
> +{
> + struct pt_regs *regs;
> +
> + regs = get_irq_regs();
> +
> +
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 06:39:56AM +, Eunbong Song wrote:
Applying - but:
> + if(regs)
^^^
There should be a blank between if and opening parenthesis.
Ralf
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
On 22/10/2014 08:54, Eunbong Song wrote:
>
>> Hi Eubong,
>
>> one small question inline ...
>
>>> +void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(bool); +#define
>>> arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
>
>> What is the purpose of this define ? is this maybe a leftover from
>>
> Hi Eubong,
> one small question inline ...
>> +void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(bool); +#define
>> arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
> What is the purpose of this define ? is this maybe a leftover from
> some regex/cleanups ?
Hi John.
Actually, I just follow
Hi Eubong,
one small question inline ...
On 22/10/2014 08:39, Eunbong Song wrote:
>
> Currently, arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() is defined in only x86
> and sparc which has nmi interrupt. But in case of softlockup not a
> hardlockup, it could be possible to dump backtrace of all cpus. and
>
This patch adds arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() for mips architecture.
Don't forget your Signed-off-by
I'm sorry fot this.
+static void arch_dump_stack(void *info)
+{
+ struct pt_regs *regs;
+
+ regs = get_irq_regs();
+
+ if(regs)
+ show_regs(regs);
+
+ dump_stack();
+}
+
Hi Eubong,
one small question inline ...
On 22/10/2014 08:39, Eunbong Song wrote:
Currently, arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() is defined in only x86
and sparc which has nmi interrupt. But in case of softlockup not a
hardlockup, it could be possible to dump backtrace of all cpus. and
this
Hi Eubong,
one small question inline ...
+void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(bool); +#define
arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
What is the purpose of this define ? is this maybe a leftover from
some regex/cleanups ?
Hi John.
Actually, I just follow the same
On 22/10/2014 08:54, Eunbong Song wrote:
Hi Eubong,
one small question inline ...
+void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(bool); +#define
arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
What is the purpose of this define ? is this maybe a leftover from
some
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 06:39:56AM +, Eunbong Song wrote:
Applying - but:
+ if(regs)
^^^
There should be a blank between if and opening parenthesis.
Ralf
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 06:39:56AM +, Eunbong Song wrote:
This patch adds arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() for mips architecture.
Don't forget your Signed-off-by
+static void arch_dump_stack(void *info)
+{
+ struct pt_regs *regs;
+
+ regs = get_irq_regs();
+
+
Hi John,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:11:39AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
On 22/10/2014 08:54, Eunbong Song wrote:
+void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(bool); +#define
arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
What is the purpose of this define ? is this maybe a
14 matches
Mail list logo
