----- Original Message ----- > Hi Dave, > > On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:03:23 -0400 (EDT) > Dave Anderson <anderson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Sounds good. So what about introducing a new macro LIVE() that > > > indicates that the dump or live system is inconsistent. > > > > Good idea -- queued for crash-6.0.6. > > There is another ACTIVE() call in s390x.c that should be changed to > LIVE(). When issuing "bt" on a running task on a live system, we > currently write "(active)". > > This should also be done for live dumps: Question: how does that code path ever get run? If you try a "bt" on an active task on a live system, it would print the "(active)" here in back_trace(), prior to calling into the machine-specific backtrace function: if (ACTIVE() && !(bt->flags & BT_EFRAME_SEARCH) && ((bt->task == tt->this_task) || is_task_active(bt->task))) { if (BT_REFERENCE_CHECK(bt) || bt->flags & (BT_TEXT_SYMBOLS_PRINT|BT_TEXT_SYMBOLS_NOPRINT)) return; if (!(bt->flags & (BT_KSTACKP|BT_TEXT_SYMBOLS|BT_TEXT_SYMBOLS_ALL))) fprintf(fp, "(active)\n"); if (!(bt->flags & (BT_TEXT_SYMBOLS|BT_TEXT_SYMBOLS_ALL))) return; } Note the "bt -[tT]" options should be allowed even if the task is active. Dave > --- > s390x.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > --- a/s390x.c > +++ b/s390x.c > @@ -1092,7 +1092,7 @@ static void s390x_back_trace_cmd(struct > * Print lowcore and print interrupt stacks when task has cpu > */ > if (s390x_has_cpu(bt)) { > - if (ACTIVE()) { > + if (LIVE()) { > fprintf(fp,"(active)\n"); > return; > } > > -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility