Szakacsits Szabolcs <szaka@sienet.hu> said:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Horst von Brand wrote:
> > It is _hard_ to do with variable length instructions (CISC, remember?), the
> > code is designed to be easily decoded forward, noone executes code going
> > backwards.
> Of course, it's a bad approach. You start earlier and stop at EIP.
> Repeat this for max(instruction length) different offsets and you will
> have the winner. Figure it out from the context after EIP.
By hand, OK. Automatically, no.
> > When I needed to look at the code in an Oops I'd either objdump(1)ed it or
> > compiled the offending stuff to assembler (possibly with custom CFLAGS to
> > get info on line numbers and such in the output).
> I was talking about cases when you can't do these.
I did this to find out where in the source it went south, and then look
around to find out why. A copy of that kernel's source is required anyway.
If you can divine the breakage just from the asm, more power to you. For us
mere mortals it isn't enough.
-- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 15 2003 - 22:00:36 EST