Messages in this thread | | | Date | 28 Jul 2006 12:35:25 +0200 | Date | Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:35:25 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.18-rc2-mm1 |
| |
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 09:55:51AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> 28.07.06 07:42 >>> > > > >fyi, Michael's dwarf unwinder seems to have broken. > >(please follow up on lkml). > > Hmm, not being able to unwind through sysenter_entry is no surprise > (this simply cannot be properly annotated, as the return address is not > explicit), but it'd end up in user mode anyway (and the inexact backtrace > doesn't go past it either). The fallback message is a little mis-leading as > what is shown is not the left-over backtrace, but the full one (Andi > probably knows better if/when/why this is supposed to be that way).
Hmm, normally it should dump only the left over entries. On my testing it did that.
> > Likewise for the more puzzling case of not being able to unwind through > error_code - the left-over trace is again more like a full one. I'm not clear > why it can't unwind through error_code here; a sufficiently large piece > of the raw stack dump would be needed to check what's going on here, > and I just again (don't know how many times I already did this) verified > that in a similar scenario I get a proper unwind through that point.
Yes I've also seen valid stack traces through error_code
> > The third one, getting stuck at __down_failed, is due to the still > unresolved issue of improper (from the perspective of stack unwinding) > instruction ordering include/asm-i386/semaphore.h.
I'll fix that. Guess we'll just drop the lock sections.
-Andi
- 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/
| |