On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 11:45:44PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 08:22:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Miles Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 24fc1024
> > > > c0198448
> > > > *pde = 00000000
> > > > Oops: 0000 [#1]
> > > > CPU: 0
> > > > EIP: 0060:[<c0198448>] Not tainted VLI
> > >
> > > I wonder why the EIP sometimes doesn't get decoded.
> > >
> > > > Using defaults from ksymoops -t elf32-i386 -a i386
> > > > EFLAGS: 00210206 (2.6.12-rc1-mm2)
> >
> > ksymoops seems to remove lines from the kernel output that it doesn't
> > like.
>
> but. but. There used to be a symbol+0xN/0xM in the EIP: line. Are you
> saying that ksymoops rubbed that out and stuck a hex number in there?
The kernel's x86 format is:
printk("EIP: %04x:[<%08lx>] CPU: %d\n",0xffff & regs->xcs,regs->eip,
smp_processor_id());
print_symbol("EIP is at %s\n", regs->eip);
so what you have there is the first EIP: line. The "EIP is at
symbol+0xN/0xM" is produced by the print_symbol statement, which
ksymoops decided to omit from the output.
It can be clearly seen from the rest of the oops (the call trace)
that print_symbol definitely does produce output, so kallsyms hasn't
been disabled.
> I wonder if there's something clever we could do to the kallsymsised oops
> output so that ksymoops would simply cease to recognise it.
I have been wondering why we still mark the addresses with [< >]
even though we've decoded them ourselves. Maybe omitting these
would be sufficient in the kallsyms-decoded case?
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
