From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751254AbWFBHVR (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:21:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751255AbWFBHVR (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:21:17 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:43207 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751254AbWFBHVQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:21:16 -0400 Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 09:21:38 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: jbeulich@novell.com, jeff@garzik.org, htejun@gmail.com, reuben-lkml@reub.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.17-rc5-mm2 Message-ID: <20060602072138.GA10622@elte.hu> References: <20060601014806.e86b3cc0.akpm@osdl.org> <447EB4AD.4060101@reub.net> <20060601025632.6683041e.akpm@osdl.org> <447EBD46.7010607@reub.net> <20060601103315.GA1865@elte.hu> <20060601105300.GA2985@elte.hu> <447EF7A8.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <447FFCAC.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20060602070948.GB9721@elte.hu> <20060602002252.aaa5e4e3.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060602002252.aaa5e4e3.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamScore: -3.1 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-3.1 required=5.9 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5000] 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 09:09:48 +0200 > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > In all other cases (if we go outside of the stack page(s)) we _must_ > > fall back to the dump 'scan the stack pages for interesting entries' > > method, to get the information out! "Uh oh the unwind info somehow got > > corrupted, sorry" is not enough to debug a kernel bug. > > Also, it might be worth doing a two-pass thing. Pass 1 doesn't print > anything - it just figures out whether pass2 will succeed. If not, > fall back without printing anything. correct, that's what stacktrace.c does for example. In the first lockdep queue i switched show_trace() to make use of stacktrace.c, so it can be used for printing traces too. Ingo