From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [PATCH] allow CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER for x86-64
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 13:21:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050909112108.GK19913@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0509091208350.6247@goblin.wat.veritas.com>
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 12:14:38PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> Ah, right. I'm using kdb with it. (And my recollection of when
> show_stack did have a framepointer version, is that it was hopelessly
> broken on interrupt frames, and we're much better off without it.)
Not sure if the x86-64 kdb had code to follow them either.
The i386 one has.
>
> > The only reason to use them would be external debuggers, but those
> > don't need them on x86-64 neither.
>
> Don't need them, but find them as useful on x86_64 as on i386?
>
> Certainly, I can go on patching in FRAME_POINTERs for x86_64
> as I have done, no problem with that. But it seems both bogus
> and unhelpful to have that "&& !X86_64" in lib/Kconfig.debug -
> framepointers are as helpful/useless on x86_64 as the rest.
The original reason was that they were never enabled because
nobody passed -fno-omit-frame-pointer. That was apparently
later fixed.
But kdb should be using a dwarf2 unwinder instead. kgdb certainly
supports that, as does NLKD.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-09 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-08 16:04 Jan Beulich
2005-09-09 8:54 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 9:16 ` Jan Beulich
2005-09-09 9:23 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 9:40 ` Jan Beulich
2005-09-09 10:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 10:58 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 11:14 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 11:21 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-09-09 11:31 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 11:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 12:00 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-09-09 17:19 ` Alexander Nyberg
2005-09-10 5:13 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-10 6:12 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 11:07 ` Philippe Elie
2005-09-09 11:19 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-09 12:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-09-09 17:50 Chuck Ebbert
2005-09-10 0:16 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050909112108.GK19913@wotan.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®