[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100329170259.GA15083@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:02:59 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 2/2] perf, x86: Utilize the LBRs for machine/oops
debugging
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> The LBRs are relatively cheap to keep enabled and provide some history to
> OOPSen, also some CPUs are reported to keep them over soft-reset, which
> allows us to use them to debug things like tripple faults.
>
> Therefore introduce a boot option: lbr_debug=on, which always enable the
> LBRs and will print the LBRs on CPU init and die().
Yummie!
Have you got some sample lbr_debug=1 output as well by any chance, with a
crash provoked somewhere? How good is the output in practice? (i.e. how many
artificial entries do we have at the end of the buffer, filled with crash
related addresses?)
Also, i think we should use something more descriptive than lbr_debug=y.
Perhaps crash_trace=1 or so?
Plus, it would be nice to have a sysctl entry for this as well - so that
production systems can enable this if they want to enrich the output of some
difficult-to-analyze kernel crash, without yet another reboot.
Ingo
--
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