Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH 2/3] reliable stack trace support (x86-64)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


> >Maybe I'm dense but I still don't get - frame has a pt_regs so why 
> >isn't the caller allowed to know about that fact?
> Because the fact that there is a regs fields and the PC is accessible through it is architecture specific, yet the
> caller (kernel/unwind.c) ought to be architecture independent.

I doubt we have any architecture where the instruction pointer is not in pt_regs,
but ok.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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]
  Powered by Linux