Re: [Crash-utility] Fix bug of list -h
----- Original Message -----
> >
> > Hello Petr and Dave,
> >
> > I misunderstood the usage.
> >
> > What I really think is changing the start address from the address of
> > list_head to the address of the structure where list_head is embedded.
> >
> > In many cases I use list command, I found I can get the address of the
> > structure where the list_head embedded directly. And I can get the
> > offset of list_head by -o option. So the offset, say "+432" in your
> > example, can be omitted. What do you think of such change?
>
> That was also my suggestion. It would even turn "list -h" into something
> useful. ;-)
>
> Here's my attempt at a patch.
Plus the documentation part.
Petr
Thinking back, I think that I left out the -h option because there's no
way the command can tell whether it's passing through the "real"
starting list_head of the list. The real starting list_head may
be either:
(1) a standalone LIST_HEAD(), or
(2) a list_head in a data structure that is different than the data
structure containing all of the entries of interest.
When that's true, the command will display a bogus structure address
for (1) or (2) when it passing through that list_head. And if
the -s option is used, it will display compete crap for that
particular entry. (unless by chance the -e option is used)
So the documentation update needs work -- it actually confuses the issue
more than it already is...
I think the -h description should state that the address is a pointer to
a "data structure containing a list_head". The "next" sentence
probably
doesn't belong there, because it's pretty much repeating the list_head
related discussion above in help page's number "2" section. And
there should probably be a caveat re: the fact that there may be
a bogus structure address shown in the case of an external LIST_HEAD()
or a starting list_head that's in a different data structure entirely.
And most importantly, a simple but clear example should be shown.
Dave