Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:55:31 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: Sigh, any ideas for a "dump_stack" name? |
| |
Russell King wrote: > > Ok, > > Still not got 2.5.40 to build... > > ARM has, since the year dot, used "dump_stack()" to display any threads > stack, and has the following prototype: > > static void dump_stack(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned long sp) > > However, somewhere in the 2.5.34 -> 2.5.40 development, "dump_stack" got > used as a way to call "show_stack" with a value of zero on x86 (which is > another externally visible function.) > > Firstly, "dump_stack" is misnamed. It dumps stack and call trace > information.
Sorry about that chief. Daniel very sensibly suggested that the new one should be called `backtrace();'
> Secondly, it creates a small problem - we're running out of names > to describe a function that displays _just_ stack contents without > any call trace information. > > So, I propose to change the ARM version to the following, unless someone > else can come up with another name or a fix the poliferation of stack- > displaying functions that the generic kernel seems to require.
The generic kernel should only require two of these functions: dump_stack() (aka backtrace()) and show_task_trace() - which traces a different thread. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |