| To: | Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this? |
| From: | Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 12 Jun 2003 06:36:46 +1000 |
| Cc: | kdb@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | Your message of "Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:36:06 MST." <3EE76886.3060108@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | kdb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:36:06 -0700, Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >x86, specifically a pentium4. Uggh, I hate top quoting on mailing lists. Turn on KDB debugging (debug the debugger). When you see the problem, 'set KDBDEBUG 0x19' and reissue bt. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Linux 2.5/2.6 support, Thomas Duffy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this?, Keith Owens |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this?, Steven Dake |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Backtraces with interrupts or signals seem unreliable, anyone else seen this?, Thomas Duffy |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |