----- Original Message ----- > Hi Mika, > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Mika Westerberg > <mika.westerberg@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 01:04:07PM +0200, Per Fransson wrote: > > > >> The 'struct stackframe' we use to keep unwind state when going from > >> one frame to the next (or should I say previous) only contains fp, > >> sp, lr and pc, which might be something we should consider changing. > >> Even as it stands however, frame.fp is assigned an incorrect value > >> for active tasks. Here's a patch to fix that. > > > > I don't understand how it can be incorred - IIRC unwind tables don't use FP at > > all. It is only there because that register can be used for other purposes and > > some unwinding instructions might restore it from the stack. > > > > Have you seen this problem really happening? > > > > Indeed I have. Looking up the pc 0xc02c9650 I find this idx entry: > > 0xc02c9610 0x000376a4 > > The insn field directs me to the following EHT: > > 0x81019b42 > > which contains two instructions: > > exec 0x9b : sp = fp > exec 0x42 : sp = sp - 0xc > > An uninitialized fp makes this fail. With my oneliner it works. > > Regards, > Per Just for the changelog, what does the backtrace failure look like? Dave -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
