[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <451BA380.7030502@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 03:27:12 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
CC: Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Put the BUG __FILE__ and __LINE__ info out of line
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Plan #17 is to just put the BUG inline and then put the EIP+file*+line into
> a separate section, then search that section at BUG time to find the record
> whose EIP points back at this ud2a.
>
Sure, but it seems a bit complex for this; I think simpler is better
when the kernel has got itself into an iffy state.
> It's a bit messy for modules, but it minimises the .text impact and keeps
> disassembly happy, no?
>
I'm not quite sure I understand your concern. You're worried about the
size increase to vmlinux in the case where you specify
CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE? Seems to me that if you specify it, you're
willing to give up some kernel space for it, and adding 5 bytes/BUG
isn't a huge deal (that's about 10k extra on my kernel).
Especially since the file+line info is mostly redundant anyway (since
the kernel can tell you what a function an EIP is in), and completely
redunant if you have debug info. I guess its mostly useful so you can
interpret the the bug message without access to kernel image.
> And if done right it can probably be used by other architectures.
>
DWARF seems like the better answer to me.
J
-
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