[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <n2i8bd0f97a1004112324g833510adr92bfd195051b882@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 02:24:09 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To: David VomLehn <dvomlehn@...co.com>
Cc: to@...mlehn-lnx2.corp.sa.net,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org"@cisco.com, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
maint_arch@...mlehn-lnx2.corp.sa.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/23] Make register values available to panic notifiers
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 02:06, David VomLehn wrote:
> This patch makes panic() and die() registers available to, for example,
> panic notifier functions. Panic notifier functions are quite useful
> for recording crash information, but they don't get passed the register
> values. This makes it hard to print register contents, do stack
> backtraces, etc. The changes in this patch save the register state when
> panic() is called and introduce a function for die() to call that allows
> it to pass in the registers it was passed.
>
> Following this patch are more patches, one per architecture. These include
> two types of changes:
> o A save_ptregs() function for the processor. I've taken a whack at
> doing this for all of the processors. I have tested x86 and MIPS
> versions. I was able to find cross compilers for ARM, ... and the
> code compiles cleanly. Everything else, well, what you see is sheer
> fantasy. You are welcome to chortle with merriment.
could you post a sample module that you're using to test with here ?
presumably you have some simple code that registers a notify handler
and then calls panic_with_regs() ...
-mike
--
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