> > Because that's really the issue: do you want a "pretty" backtrace, or do 
> > you want one that is rock solid but has some crud in it.
> 
> I just want an as exact backtrace as possible. I also think
> that we can make the unwinder robust enough.

Any reason you can't put the exact back trace in "[xxx]" and the ones we
see on the stack which dont look like call trace as ?xxx? It makes the
code a bit trickier but we depend on the quality of traces

Alan
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to