This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: stack_used() not accurate?

From: fche at redhat dot com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
To: "Mike Snitzer" <snitzer at gmail dot com>
Cc: "Wenji Huang" <wenji dot huang at oracle dot com>, systemtap at sourceware dot org
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:29:26 -0400
Subject: Re: stack_used() not accurate?
References: <170fa0d20805281912r54e0f931h9bdbc9e9c7880b7e@mail.gmail.com> <483E720D.8050808@oracle.com> <y0mprr59nf4.fsf@ton.toronto.redhat.com> <170fa0d20805290843t4c8efa40x86a5705ee97d4d8b@mail.gmail.com>

"Mike Snitzer" <snitzer@gmail.com> writes:

> [...]  I'll be exploring other implementations, but any suggestions
> would be very welcome.

THREAD_SIZE should give a good normal kernel stack size.  The
kprobe-context stack pointer would be better decoded from its pt_regs
rather than that embedded-c &a hack.

- FChE

Follow-Ups:
- Re: stack_used() not accurate?
  - From: Mike Snitzer

References:
- stack_used() not accurate?
  - From: Mike Snitzer
- Re: stack_used() not accurate?
  - From: Wenji Huang
- Re: stack_used() not accurate?
  - From: Frank Ch. Eigler
- Re: stack_used() not accurate?
  - From: Mike Snitzer

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]