From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751357AbWERMZ4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 08:25:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751358AbWERMZ4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 08:25:56 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:19394 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751357AbWERMZz (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 08:25:55 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: discuss@x86-64.org Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH 2/3] reliable stack trace support (x86-64) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:25:51 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: "Jan Beulich" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <4469FC22.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <200605181220.46037.ak@suse.de> <446C7E61.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> In-Reply-To: <446C7E61.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200605181425.51442.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >Maybe I'm dense but I still don't get - frame has a pt_regs so why > >isn't the caller allowed to know about that fact? > > Because the fact that there is a regs fields and the PC is accessible through it is architecture specific, yet the > caller (kernel/unwind.c) ought to be architecture independent. I doubt we have any architecture where the instruction pointer is not in pt_regs, but ok. -Andi