From: Alexander Nyberg <alexn@telia.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [PATCH] allow CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER for x86-64
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 19:19:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050909171929.GA4155@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200509091258.13300.ak@suse.de>
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 12:58:12PM +0200 Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Friday 09 September 2005 12:45, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > But why would anyone want frame pointers on x86-64?
> > >
> > > I'd put the question differently: Why should x86-64 not allow what
> > > other architectures do?
> > >
> > > But of course, I'm not insisting on this patch to get in, it just
> > > seemed an obvious inconsistency...
> >
> > I'm with Jan on this. I use a similar patch for frame pointers on
> > x86_64 most of the time, in the hope of getting more accurate backtraces.
>
> It won't give more accurate backtraces, not even on i386 because show_stack
> doesn't have any code to follow frame pointers.
>
Huh? print_context_stack follows frame pointers which is called from
show_stack
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-09 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-08 16:04 [PATCH] allow CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER for x86-64 Jan Beulich
2005-09-09 8:54 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 9:16 ` Jan Beulich
2005-09-09 9:23 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 9:40 ` Jan Beulich
2005-09-09 10:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 10:58 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 11:14 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 11:21 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 11:31 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 11:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 12:00 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 17:19 ` Alexander Nyberg [this message]
2005-09-10 5:13 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-10 6:12 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 11:07 ` Philippe Elie
2005-09-09 11:19 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 12:41 ` Eric Dumazet
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-09-09 17:50 Chuck Ebbert
2005-09-10 0:16 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050909171929.GA4155@localhost.localdomain \
--to=alexn@telia.com \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.