[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9a8748490607190159nf753e05td06062dd21d4aac@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 10:59:36 +0200
From: "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
To: "Chuck Ebbert" <76306.1226@...puserve.com>
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...l.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] i386: show_registers(): try harder to print failing code
On 19/07/06, Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@...puserve.com> wrote:
> In-Reply-To: <9a8748490607181512t11e9970eu1a7aa1ad1644ec54@...l.gmail.com>
>
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 00:12:32 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> >
> > > show_registers() tries to dump failing code starting 43 bytes
> > > before the offending instruction, but this address can be bad,
> > > for example in a device driver where the failing instruction is
> > > less than 43 bytes from the start of the driver's code. When that
> > > happens, try to dump code starting at the failing instruction
> > > instead of printing no code at all.
> > >
> > Shouldn't the kernel be printing some info noting that this fallback
> > is in use then? Or will that be completely obvious and I'm just not
> > able to see that?
>
> The code byte at EIP is marked with '<>', so it's obvious:
>
> Code: <a1> 00 00 00 00 c7 04 24 05 30 b5 de 89 44 24 04 e8 f5 6f 5c e1 c9 31 c0 c3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>
Ahh, ok. I was not aware of that. Thank you for the info.
--
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists