Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 22:00:24 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: KDB_TRACE and no backend Message-ID: <4C950C48.6020600@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4C9507D1.3010008@icyb.net.ua> References: <4C94A138.8050905@icyb.net.ua> <AANLkTingR6k6xdQJ3cZH8EkJeCWnq5vzeEjGHNaDv8AT@mail.gmail.com> <4C9507D1.3010008@icyb.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 18/09/2010 21:41 Andriy Gapon said the following: > on 18/09/2010 21:26 Attilio Rao said the following: >> >> You have to eventually wrap this logic within the 'STACK' option >> (opt_stack.h for the check) because stack_save() will be uneffective >> otherwise. STACK should be mandatory for DDB I guess, but it is not >> for KDB. > > Thank you for the tip! > BTW, why is this under an option? > It seems like something like this won't add much to kernel size and won't affect > performance at all. > Oh, wow, and I totally overlooked stack_print(). Should have read stack(9) from the start. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C950C48.6020600>