Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1631623 > unrolled thread

[PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps

Started byJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
First post2017-04-26 19:50 +0200
Last post2017-05-04 10:30 +0200
Articles 8 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-04-26 19:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> - 2017-04-26 22:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> - 2017-05-03 21:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-05-03 21:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-05-03 21:50 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> - 2017-05-03 23:40 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-05-04 02:30 +0200
            Re: [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com> - 2017-05-04 10:30 +0200

#1631623 — [PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2017-04-26 19:50 +0200
Subject[PATCH] ARM: Fix __show_regs output timestamps
Message-ID<tAzeG-5qR-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
subsequent lines may not have timestamps.

Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.

Previous:

[ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff

New:

[ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
[ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff

Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
---
 arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
index 939e8b58c59d..151cece4a293 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
@@ -123,10 +123,10 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs)
 
 	print_symbol("PC is at %s\n", instruction_pointer(regs));
 	print_symbol("LR is at %s\n", regs->ARM_lr);
-	printk("pc : [<%08lx>]    lr : [<%08lx>]    psr: %08lx\n"
-	       "sp : %08lx  ip : %08lx  fp : %08lx\n",
-		regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr,
-		regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp);
+	printk("pc : [<%08lx>]    lr : [<%08lx>]    psr: %08lx\n",
+	       regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr);
+	printk("sp : %08lx  ip : %08lx  fp : %08lx\n",
+	       regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp);
 	printk("r10: %08lx  r9 : %08lx  r8 : %08lx\n",
 		regs->ARM_r10, regs->ARM_r9,
 		regs->ARM_r8);
-- 
2.10.0.rc2.1.g053435c

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1631700

FromAndreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
Date2017-04-26 22:20 +0200
Message-ID<tABzQ-77B-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1631623

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:39:49 -0700
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:

> Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
> subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
> 
> Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
> This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
> 
> Previous:
> 
> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> 
> New:
> 
> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> 
[  102.669036] PC is at hso_start_net_device+0x50/0xc0 [hso]
[  102.674835] LR is at hso_net_open+0x68/0x84 [hso]
[  102.679809] pc : [<bf785304>]    lr : [<bf785ed8>]    psr: a00b0013
[  102.686462] sp : ed047e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff

yes, the kernel oopses in a nicer way.

Tested-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>

Regards,
Andreas Kemnade

> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> index 939e8b58c59d..151cece4a293 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> @@ -123,10 +123,10 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  
>  	print_symbol("PC is at %s\n", instruction_pointer(regs));
>  	print_symbol("LR is at %s\n", regs->ARM_lr);
> -	printk("pc : [<%08lx>]    lr : [<%08lx>]    psr: %08lx\n"
> -	       "sp : %08lx  ip : %08lx  fp : %08lx\n",
> -		regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr,
> -		regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp);
> +	printk("pc : [<%08lx>]    lr : [<%08lx>]    psr: %08lx\n",
> +	       regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr);
> +	printk("sp : %08lx  ip : %08lx  fp : %08lx\n",
> +	       regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp);
>  	printk("r10: %08lx  r9 : %08lx  r8 : %08lx\n",
>  		regs->ARM_r10, regs->ARM_r9,
>  		regs->ARM_r8);

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1635227

FromRussell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Date2017-05-03 21:30 +0200
Message-ID<tD88h-1cl-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1631623
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
> subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
> 
> Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
> This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
> 
> Previous:
> 
> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> 
> New:
> 
> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>

Hi Joe,

Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to
apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.)

Thanks.

> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> index 939e8b58c59d..151cece4a293 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c
> @@ -123,10 +123,10 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  
>  	print_symbol("PC is at %s\n", instruction_pointer(regs));
>  	print_symbol("LR is at %s\n", regs->ARM_lr);
> -	printk("pc : [<%08lx>]    lr : [<%08lx>]    psr: %08lx\n"
> -	       "sp : %08lx  ip : %08lx  fp : %08lx\n",
> -		regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr,
> -		regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp);
> +	printk("pc : [<%08lx>]    lr : [<%08lx>]    psr: %08lx\n",
> +	       regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr);
> +	printk("sp : %08lx  ip : %08lx  fp : %08lx\n",
> +	       regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp);
>  	printk("r10: %08lx  r9 : %08lx  r8 : %08lx\n",
>  		regs->ARM_r10, regs->ARM_r9,
>  		regs->ARM_r8);
> -- 
> 2.10.0.rc2.1.g053435c
> 

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1635239

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2017-05-03 21:50 +0200
Message-ID<tD8rE-1jm-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1635227
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
> > subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
> > 
> > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
> > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
> > 
> > Previous:
> > 
> > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > 
> > New:
> > 
> > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> 
> Hi Joe,
> 
> Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to
> apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.)
> 
> Thanks.

Rehi Russell.

Done, and I had to lookup your "my patch system", even
though it was in your trailer, the email address of the
system wasn't listed until bullet point 8.

If you've the time to ask me to do this, it seems likely
you could have forwarded the original email to your patch
system yourself instead.

Also "patches@armlinux.org.uk" isn't mentioned at all in
either the documentation or MAINTAINERS.  Should it be?

btw: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/info.php
has many outdated references like:

    Once the 2.7 kernel opens, support for new features in the 2.6
    kernels will not be accepted unless similar support is also available
    for the 2.7 kernel.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1635244

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2017-05-03 21:50 +0200
Message-ID<tD8rE-1jm-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1635227
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
> > subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
> > 
> > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
> > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
> > 
> > Previous:
> > 
> > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > 
> > New:
> > 
> > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> 
> Hi Joe,
> 
> Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to
> apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.)
> 
> Thanks.

Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch
because your system wants totally unnecessary additional
information specific to your workflow.

No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to
please your system and neither should anyone else.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1635288

FromRussell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Date2017-05-03 23:40 +0200
Message-ID<tDaa6-2vi-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1635244
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:44:11PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
> > > subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
> > > 
> > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
> > > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
> > > 
> > > Previous:
> > > 
> > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > > sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > > 
> > > New:
> > > 
> > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> > 
> > Hi Joe,
> > 
> > Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to
> > apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.)
> > 
> > Thanks.
> 
> Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch
> because your system wants totally unnecessary additional
> information specific to your workflow.
> 
> No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to
> please your system and neither should anyone else.

Don't expect me to remember to apply your patch then.  I've got days of
catch up, and I'm just not going to remember.  Sorry.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1635352

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2017-05-04 02:30 +0200
Message-ID<tDcOB-4jz-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1635288
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 22:30 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:44:11PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
> > > > subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
> > > > 
> > > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
> > > > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
> > > > 
> > > > Previous:
> > > > 
> > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > > > sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > > > 
> > > > New:
> > > > 
> > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
> > > > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> > > 
> > > Hi Joe,
> > > 
> > > Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to
> > > apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.)
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > 
> > Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch
> > because your system wants totally unnecessary additional
> > information specific to your workflow.
> > 
> > No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to
> > please your system and neither should anyone else.
> 
> Don't expect me to remember to apply your patch then.  I've got days of
> catch up, and I'm just not going to remember.  Sorry.

<shrug>

If your systems require special handling on the
part of patch submitters, you should document it
in the kernel tree.

Better, someone else should find the time to apply
properly formatted patches.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1635476

FromVladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
Date2017-05-04 10:30 +0200
Message-ID<tDkj8-Vp-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1635352
On 04/05/17 01:24, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 22:30 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:44:11PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>>> Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and
>>>>> subsequent lines may not have timestamps.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult.
>>>>> This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar.
>>>>>
>>>>> Previous:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
>>>>> sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
>>>>>
>>>>> New:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>]    lr : [<bf79ced8>]    psr: a00f0013
>>>>> [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20  ip : 00000000  fp : ffffffff
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Joe,
>>>>
>>>> Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to
>>>> apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch
>>> because your system wants totally unnecessary additional
>>> information specific to your workflow.
>>>
>>> No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to
>>> please your system and neither should anyone else.
>>
>> Don't expect me to remember to apply your patch then.  I've got days of
>> catch up, and I'm just not going to remember.  Sorry.
> 
> <shrug>
> 
> If your systems require special handling on the
> part of patch submitters, you should document it
> in the kernel tree.
> 
> Better, someone else should find the time to apply
> properly formatted patches.
> 

Joe, I find this patch handy, so I've uploaded it into Russell's patch system
on your behalf and it has been accepted as patch 8673/1.

Cheers
Vladimir

> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web