x86: don't pretend that non-framepointer stack traces are reliable
Without frame pointers enabled, the x86 stack traces should not
pretend to be reliable; instead they should just be what they are:
unreliable.
The effect of this is that they have a '?' printed in the stacktrace,
to warn the reader that these entries are guesses rather than known
based on more reliable information.
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
index 6b1f6f6..87d103d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@
frame = frame->next_frame;
bp = (unsigned long) frame;
} else {
- ops->address(data, addr, bp == 0);
+ ops->address(data, addr, 0);
}
print_ftrace_graph_addr(addr, data, ops, tinfo, graph);
}
