Dne Čt 7. června 2012 14:07:59 Petr Tesarik napsal(a):
Dne Čt 7. června 2012 03:58:16 qiaonuohan napsal(a):
> At 2012-6-6 21:44, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> > crash> list task_struct.tasks -s task_struct.tasks -h 0xeede04f0+432
> > eede04f0
> >
> > tasks = {
> >
> > next = 0xd79d6f20,
> > prev = 0xd55e6220
> >
> > }
> >
> > d79d6d70
> >
> > tasks = {
> >
> > next = 0xc32c5320,
> > prev = 0xeede06a0
> >
> > }
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Note that the first element in the list (the one which contains the
> > starting list_head) is included.
> >
> > Based on the above, I'm afraid don't quite get the intended goal of
> > your patch.
>
> 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