From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:47:40 +0000 Subject: Re: [patch] 2.6.3 sync unwind code with 2.4.25 Message-Id: <16442.29948.177970.936607@napali.hpl.hp.com> List-Id: References: <4545.1077507994@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <4545.1077507994@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:38:16 +1100, Keith Owens said: Keith> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:07:39 -0800, Keith> David Mosberger wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:46:34 +1100, Keith Owens said: Keith> The unwind code in 2.6.3 is missing a debug patch. This Keith> patch is in 2.4.25 and makes it much easier to diagnose Keith> unwind problems. printk output does not appear when Keith> in_interrupt(), kdb_printf output does. This brings 2.6.3 Keith> unwind closer to 2.4.25. >> Sorry, but I just don't see why there should be KDB-stuff in unwind.c >> when KDB isn't part of the official Linux tree. Keith> You took the same patch for unwind.c in the 2.4 kernel. Well, that was 2.4. I don't recall the details, but like I said, I don't see a good reason for including KDB patches in the default kernel when KDB isn't part of it. --david