> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 11:24:36 +0200
> From: Paul Irofti <p...@irofti.net>
>
> On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 02:48:59AM +0200, Paul Irofti wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 01:43:35AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2017 18:51:34 +0100
> > > > From: Martin Pieuchot <m...@openbsd.org>
> > > >
> > > > On 04/11/17(Sat) 17:20, Paul Irofti wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Someone, somewhere (perhaps on bugs@?) said they would like to see
> > > > > something useful when typing show panic on a page fault'd kernel. That
> > > > > struck very close to home so I went ahead and did it.
> > > > >
> > > > > The following diff shows the uvm_fault and the first trace entry in an
> > > > > attempt to mimic a real show panic. The uvm_fault entry is extra.
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently I only wrote support for amd64 but I can add support for
> > > > > other architectures if you guys like it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > I think you should just change the printf("uvm_fault...) into a panic.
> > >
> > > No. That makes it a lot harder to investigate the faulting instruction.
> > >
> > > I think Paul's idea makes sense; might need a bit of polishing though.
> >
> > Good, we now have a direction. I am all ears about polishing the current
> > diff.
> > The construct is the same as that used for panicstr.
>
> Ping! Should I commit this as is for you to polish later?
Please send the diff again. It dropped from my cache ;).
