| To: | Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this? |
| From: | Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:36:06 -0700 |
| Cc: | kdb@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <10197.1055298337@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <10197.1055298337@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | kdb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529 |
x86, specifically a pentium4. Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:08:13 -0700, Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:It seems when an interrupt or signal occurs, which results in an exception frame (with frame pointers on), KDB has trouble decoding that frame properly when using the backtrace functionality. If I get past the exception frame, the rest of the backtrace looks fine.Has anyone seen this behavior? I am using KDB 4.1.Which architecture? Every arch has different ways of decoding the frames. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Linux 2.5/2.6 support, glowell |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Linux 2.5/2.6 support, Thomas Duffy |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this?, Keith Owens |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this?, Keith Owens |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |