Re: [PATCH 2/3] use usual call trace format on x86-64

On Monday 16 January 2006 13:32, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 01:22:41PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Monday 16 January 2006 13:18, Akinobu Mita wrote:
> > > Use print_symbol() to dump call trace.
> > 
> > Rejected.
> 
> Why?  This is a lot more readable than what's there, and similar to other
> architectures.

See my reply to 0/0

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH 0/3] changes about Call Trace:
    • From: [email protected] (Akinobu Mita)
  • Re: [PATCH 2/3] use usual call trace format on x86-64
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 2/3] use usual call trace format on x86-64
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/3] use usual call trace format on x86-64
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.15-mm4 failure on power5
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/3] use usual call trace format on x86-64
• Next by thread: [PATCH 3/3] omit symbol size field in print_symbol()
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]