Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-20 Thread Dave Anderson
Queued for crash-7.2.1: https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/commit/090bf28907782549ba980c588979372061764aa7 When 4.14 gets released and some dumpfiles start showing up, the pt_regs raw stack dump issue can be revisited. Thanks, Dave - Original Message - > > > -

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-20 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > Dave, > > Thanks for your double-check, > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:55:11PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > > > Hi Takahiro, > > > > > > I haven't had a chance to investigate why it fails, but with this latest >

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-19 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
Dave, Thanks for your double-check, On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:55:11PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > > > Hi Takahiro, > > > > I haven't had a chance to investigate why it fails, but with this latest > > patch applied, the "bt -[fF]" option fails to show

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-19 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > > Hi Takahiro, > > I haven't had a chance to investigate why it fails, but with this latest > patch applied, the "bt -[fF]" option fails to show the topmost frame dump > for *all* user-space tasks. By *all* user-space tasks, I mean in pre-4.14 dumpfiles. I

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-19 Thread Dave Anderson
Hi Takahiro, I haven't had a chance to investigate why it fails, but with this latest patch applied, the "bt -[fF]" option fails to show the topmost frame dump for *all* user-space tasks. For example, here frame #6 is missing its dump: crash> bt -f 1 PID: 1 TASK: ffc3e889

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-18 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
Dave, On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 02:12:17PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 03:44:36PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Takahiro, much appreciated. Queued for crash-7.2.1: > > > > > > > > >

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-18 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 03:44:36PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > Thanks Takahiro, much appreciated. Queued for crash-7.2.1: > > > > > > https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/commit/2b93c036edf2a5cc21a06a14f377cd9b365f858a > > Oops, I've made small

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-18 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 03:44:36PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > Thanks Takahiro, much appreciated. Queued for crash-7.2.1: > > > https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/commit/2b93c036edf2a5cc21a06a14f377cd9b365f858a Oops, I've made small changes, nothing essential but some sort of

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-17 Thread Dave Anderson
Thanks Takahiro, much appreciated. Queued for crash-7.2.1: https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/commit/2b93c036edf2a5cc21a06a14f377cd9b365f858a Dave - Original Message - > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:33:45PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > Hi Takahiro, > > > > One question

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-16 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:33:45PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > Hi Takahiro, > > One question about a segment of your patch that I can't test because > I don't have a 4.14 dumpfile. Here in arm64_switch_stack(), you have > conditionalized the display of the exception frame: > > @@ -2669,7

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-13 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
And please note that THREAD_SIZE, hence IRQ_STACK_SIZE, is no longer constant since v4.14 due to KASAN and VMAP_STACK. -Takahiro AKASHI On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 05:29:12PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > Dave, > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 03:06:00PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > Jan, > >

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-10-13 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
Dave, On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 03:06:00PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: > > Jan, > > I went back to creating a machdep->machspec->user_eframe_offset value > to be able to account for both the 4.7 and the upcoming 4.14 pt_regs > changes: > > >

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-22 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > > - Original Message - > > Ok. I have seen this change in the pt_regs struct before but did not connect > > it to this problem. I see these new field in pt_regs in earlier kernel > > versions than 4.7, but it is probably backports. It really does not

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-22 Thread Karlsson, Jan
rnstra <reinoudkoorns...@gmail.com> Skickat: den 21 september 2017 22:46 Till: Discussion list for crash utility usage, maintenance and development Ämne: Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64 On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Dave Anderson <ander...@redhat.com> wrote: > >

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-21 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > Ok. I have seen this change in the pt_regs struct before but did not connect > it to this problem. I see these new field in pt_regs in earlier kernel > versions than 4.7, but it is probably backports. It really does not matter > for the solution of the problem. The

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-21 Thread Dave Anderson
t; your patch does the same thing. > > Jan > > > Från: crash-utility-boun...@redhat.com <crash-utility-boun...@redhat.com> för > Dave Anderson <ander...@redhat.com> > Skickat: den 21 september 2017 17:38 > Till: Discussion list for crash utility usage,

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-21 Thread Karlsson, Jan
com <crash-utility-boun...@redhat.com> för Dave Anderson <ander...@redhat.com> Skickat: den 21 september 2017 17:38 Till: Discussion list for crash utility usage, maintenance and development Ämne: Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64 - Original Message - > &

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-21 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > > > - Original Message - > > Hi Dave > > > > I have experienced some problems in the bt command for ARM64. It seems that > > the test in arm64_print_exception_frame in arm64.c if the task is running > > in > > 32 or 64-bit mode in userland does not

Re: [Crash-utility] Problem in bt for ARM64

2017-09-21 Thread Dave Anderson
- Original Message - > Hi Dave > > I have experienced some problems in the bt command for ARM64. It seems that > the test in arm64_print_exception_frame in arm64.c if the task is running in > 32 or 64-bit mode in userland does not work. It "always" becomes 32-bit > mode. Example: > >