From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262819AbVG2UiL (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:38:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262786AbVG2Ufs (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:35:48 -0400 Received: from outpost.ds9a.nl ([213.244.168.210]:27794 "EHLO outpost.ds9a.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262800AbVG2Ufe (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:35:34 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 22:34:04 +0200 From: bert hubert To: Xin Zhao Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why dump_stack results different so much? Message-ID: <20050729203403.GA30603@outpost.ds9a.nl> Mail-Followup-To: bert hubert , Xin Zhao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <4ae3c140507291327143a9d83@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ae3c140507291327143a9d83@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 04:27:16PM -0400, Xin Zhao wrote: > I supprisely noticed that the dump_stack results are quite different! > Why did I get the calling traces below our_ssy_open() and above > syscall_call()? Any thought on this? Many thanks! This might depend on compiling with frame pointers, or not. I recall that at one point, the kernel did a basic scan of addresses that looked like likely candidates to have been pointers, and printed those. Frame pointers are hailed as improving backtraces. They are in the 'kernel hacking' section of the kernel configuration. Sorry that I can't be more precise, but try turning on frame pointers. Good luck! -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Open source, database driven DNS Software http://netherlabs.nl Open and Closed source services