[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150223121751.3fbb0885@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 12:17:51 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Adrien Schildknecht <adrien+dev@...ischi.me>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
x86@...nel.org, srostedt@...hat.com, luto@...capital.net,
bp@...en8.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: use kstack_end() in dumpstack_64.c
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 16:23:58 +0100
Adrien Schildknecht <adrien+dev@...ischi.me> wrote:
> i386 is already using kstack_end() in dumpstack_32.c.
> We should also use it to make the code clearer and unify the stack
> printing logic some more.
Looks fine to me.
>
> This patch depends on patch "x86: fix output of show_stack_log_lvl()"
I'm curious to what the dependency is? What would break if we apply
this without that patch?
-- Steve
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrien Schildknecht <adrien+dev@...ischi.me>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_64.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_64.c
> index 553573b..5f1c626 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_64.c
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ show_stack_log_lvl(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs,
> pr_cont(" <EOI> ");
> }
> } else {
> - if (((long) stack & (THREAD_SIZE-1)) == 0)
> + if (kstack_end(stack))
> break;
> }
> if ((i % STACKSLOTS_PER_LINE) == 0) {
--
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