From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0180.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DF5B1A0B99 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 04:24:26 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 12:24:19 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Michael Ellerman Cc: LKML , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, chuhu@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ppc: Implement save_stack_trace_regs() Message-ID: <20151216122419.385f1306@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <1449622985.6028.8.camel@ellerman.id.au> References: <20151208135056.718b7668@gandalf.local.home> <1449620422.6028.6.camel@ellerman.id.au> <20151208192844.70fb33e6@gandalf.local.home> <1449622985.6028.8.camel@ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 12:03:05 +1100 Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > Should I take this via powerpc or do you want it to go in via tracing? > > > > You can take it. And you can replace the PT_R1 if you want. I just > > noticed that it was defined, and I try to use macro names instead of > > hard coded numbers. I was actually looking for a "PT_SP" :-) > > OK thanks. > > Looks like we actually have: > > #define kernel_stack_pointer(regs) ((regs)->gpr[1]) > > So that would be the most self documenting way to do it I guess, though I've > never actually seen that macro used anywhere before :) Hi, Are you going to take this, or do you want me to? -- Steve