From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:23:14 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC] Enhanced show_stack output to add backing store regs Message-Id: <16946.3138.31881.366108@napali.hpl.hp.com> List-Id: References: <1110566404.498.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1110566404.498.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:19:49 -0700, Bob Montgomery said: Bob> You might trust the unwinder, and that *might* be a reason to lop off Bob> the top two (show regs and show stack), but I still want to see what Bob> kernel handler was used, and it's still reassuring to be able to che= ck Bob> at show_stack to verify that bsp < sp to eliminate stack overflow as Bob> the source of either the problem, or the problem with the unwinding = that Bob> follows. That's true. Bob> I'm assuming in my example, that not printing until the interruption Bob> frame would eliminate what is shown below, and I would like to keep Bob> that: Bob> [] die+0x150/0x280 Bob> sp=E0000001200dfb40 bsp=E0000001200d8f20 Bob> [] die_if_kernel+0x40/0x60 Bob> sp=E0000001200dfb40 bsp=E0000001200d8ef0 Bob> [] ia64_fault+0x150/0xac0 Bob> sp=E0000001200dfb40 bsp=E0000001200d8ea8 Bob> [] ia64_leave_kernel+0x0/0x260 Bob> sp=E0000001200dfc40 bsp=E0000001200d8ea8 Bob> and not just see the stack top out at Bob> [] buncho_going_to_regnat+0x50/0xa0 [buncho] Bob> sp=E0000001200dfe10 bsp=E0000001200d8e80 Bob> ... Bob> where the error occurred. No, other arches start past the interrupt frame, i.e., you'd get the latter output. Stack-corruption is an important concern, I agree. That's the only reason I haven't gotten rid of the "sp" and "bsp" printing. --david