Re: [Xen-devel] BUG() shortcomings

To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] BUG() shortcomings
From:	Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:38:18 +0000
Delivery-date:	Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:38:45 -0800
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<45506AD8.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AccCWNZaFPqHmm5MEdurgAAX8io7RQ==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] BUG() shortcomings
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620



On 7/11/06 10:15, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Having run into BUG()s a number of times recently, I realized that other than
> on Linux under Xen the register state dumped in this case is mostly unrelated
> to the actual registers that were in effect when the macro was invoked. This
> is rather unfortunate, as without the register state it usually requires being
> able to reproduce the problem after having added extra debug code. Would
> it therefore be acceptable to make BUG() work more Linux-like?

Yes, could be handy.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] BUG() shortcomings