lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: boot failure, "DWARF2 unwinder stuck at 0xc0100199"
>> >Guys, this unwinder change has been quite problematic.  We really cannot
>> >let this badness out into 2.6.18 - it degrades our ability to debug every
>> >subsystem in the entire kernel. Would marking it CONFIG_BROKEN get us back
>> >to 2.6.17 behaviour?
>>
>> I'd prefer pushing into 2.6.18 some of the patches currently scheduled for
>> 2.6.19 over marking it CONFIG_BROKEN. But that's clearly not my decision.
>
>Hmm, which patches did you want? I got a double digit number of unwind
>related patches already, some of them quite intrusive, and all of them would be clearly
>too much. My preference for 2.6.18 would be really only absolutely critical stuff
>because I'm paranoid of breaking more.

I was thinking of the fixes to the fallback logic and the bottom-of-stack annotations.

Jan
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-22 10:35    [W:0.067 / U:31.216 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site