Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 Mar 2002 19:31:01 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] generic show_stack facility |
| |
Keith Owens wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 10:41:11 -0800, > Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au> wrote: > >Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 09:36:26AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> > Here's the diff. Comments? > >> > >> I don't see who having to independand declaration in the same kernel > >> image are supposed to work.. > > > >It goes in lib/lib.a. The linker will only pick up > >the default version if the architecture doesn't > >have its own dump_stack(). > > > >bust_spinlocks() has worked that way for quite some time. > > I have a problem with putting routines in lib.a and relying on the > linker to pull them out by default. It does not work for routines > called from modules, modules do not include lib.a. Remember the recent > problems with crc32.o? > > bust_spinlocks() is not an issue because it is only called from built > in code. show_stack() has been used as a debugging facility and it > could be called from a module.
Yes, that's a good point. We're safe as long as core kernel always contains a call to dump_stack(). Which is the case, but that's a bit subtle for general usage. - 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/
| |