From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/6] Improve fault report From: Philippe Gerum In-Reply-To: <44A234F9.9010705@domain.hid> References: <20060626172116.019532000@domain.hid> <20060626172118.347530000@domain.hid> <1151480559.5154.2.camel@domain.hid> <44A234F9.9010705@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:04:49 +0200 Message-Id: <1151481889.5154.14.camel@domain.hid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: rpm@xenomai.org List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 09:51 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 19:21 +0200, jan.kiszka@domain.hid wrote: > >> plain text document attachment (enhance-kernel-fault-report.patch) > >> Introduce xnarch_fault_um() to test if a fault happened in user-mode and applies the new feature to report core and driver crashes more verbosely. > > > >> if (xnpod_shadow_p()) { > >> #ifdef CONFIG_XENO_OPT_DEBUG > >> - if (xnarch_fault_notify(fltinfo)) /* Don't report debug traps */ > >> + if (!xnarch_fault_um(fltinfo)) { > >> + xnarch_trace_panic_freeze(); > > > > KGDB breakpoint issue? > > Sorry, please switch on verbose mode, didn't get yet what you mean. Oops, sorry. I meant: what if a KGDB breakpoint is hit from kernel space while running a shadow thread? The way I read the modified test sequence above, such bp trap is going to trigger a panic, instead of being silently passed to Linux. > > > > >> + xnprintf > >> + ("Switching %s to secondary mode after exception #%u in " > >> + "kernel-space at 0x%lx (pid %d)\n", thread->name, > >> + xnarch_fault_trap(fltinfo), > >> + xnarch_fault_pc(fltinfo), > >> + xnthread_user_pid(thread)); > >> + xnarch_trace_panic_dump(); > >> + } else if (xnarch_fault_notify(fltinfo)) /* Don't report debug traps */ > > > > Jan > -- Philippe.