[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb26bda65b80eef4916a94f5e4c534d55015d28d.camel@neuling.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 12:11:49 +1000
From: Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>
To: Murilo Opsfelder Araujo <muriloo@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alastair D'Silva <alastair@...ilva.org>,
Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
Cyril Bur <cyrilbur@...il.com>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Simon Guo <wei.guo.simon@...il.com>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Tobin C . Harding" <me@...in.cc>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] powerpc: Modernize unhandled signals message
> > Should we prefix every line with the PID to avoid this?
>
> That's possible. An alternative would be prefixing each line with the
> process name and its PID, as in the first line. For example:
>
> pandafault[10758]: segfault (11) at 00000000100007d0 nip 000000001000061c lr 00007fffabc85100 code 2 in pandafault[10000000+10000]
> pandafault[10758]: Instruction dump:
> pandafault[10758]: 4bfffeec 4bfffee8 3c401002 38427f00 fbe1fff8 f821ffc1 7c3f0b78 3d22fffe
> pandafault[10758]: 392988d0 f93f0020 e93f0020 39400048 <99490000> 39200000 7d234b78 383f0040
>
> The above can be interleaved with other messages and we'll still be able
> to match process and its corresponding instruction dump.
LGTM.
Thanks!
Mikey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists