On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 13:29 -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:20:46 -0800
> Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Introduce printk_address to X86_32 in a simplified form for
> > now.  Reformat X86_64 printk_address to avoid two declarations.
> > 
> > Change the printk formats on X86_32 and 64 to be similar.
> 
> I'm not entirely convinced on this; I need to look closer but it appears the 32 bit version 
> doesn't use the "reliable" argument to print a ? in front of the dubious backtrace entries;
> that would be sort of a step backwards; (
> 

Sorry, I should have made it clearer that this was more for discussion
of the actual formatting.

printk_address needs to be ported to X86_32, the one in this patch
is just a placeholder.  Looking at the X86_64 version it looks like
it can be brought straight across, but I haven't tested that yet.

Harvey

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/