From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BDB6C47076 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 18:50:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4FE3611AD for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 18:50:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B4FE3611AD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=5QMKuSrGq0IzWJvCjXbQ0jViYL12G7DTi8iuq8ke4tg=; b=GkhsibD5p/FMuGVrXvKN7QsSPW WeWYGISYGUt7hnkIg9JkGusrpEuyOStWp3J85Z7oGOMKzlD7BHKvYAuTMcGbCsakGWSAW0kRV5BQn CdVFJrLPh38+JQQO/FqZsRyrHbdNTTF/Bo/I7EbF6HIzs8Iwe4epTqzkAi3OIAQa2zfGlFYw23vJx Be7qcUjvKP9H88VqJiJyzw361ht0qXYpqg5ILPmxD9MrCYW7dP8uhT6l3XZKI8JHWMW7ZM2m+z6mD HIneys5c+4Rclt6ndlYclUnvtX4sqSvSQt62i5dG5sKdHLWQOawhEc3ERWvxDNoS4bRZeBC1P1+ax 1cTuJweA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=desiato.infradead.org) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lkACF-000mvN-Ky; Fri, 21 May 2021 18:48:31 +0000 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:e::133]) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lkACC-000muh-9N for linux-arm-kernel@desiato.infradead.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 18:48:28 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=RabyVfBo+mpfsjY1+7E6nJCVxTgd3EWR2ZAwlRxq+pc=; b=n/5Jr8zrOAKGK8CyKw/QO2w6si S6rxCHyMLjiTn8SE2YDMz6gWhLaPr8OrHj6H7+LF15dAn88aGJSONd2Q95Dkjfo8cRbubPoqviyNK F88bWTx6fae8nnt017QQBIfxJISB1hORgCBFkJ0+BmjzSW4Y7JFeugVkzpjU9fUziyh8cth394JGJ CT/9Ej6vuQrXCZRydSruOKEQ4VtAcCu1k9teMsfLUbeWQnTY8u0SxdOaCNNtWLazidql1vJuyBBj2 m+/GjLrDECLqA4K5+WeSWU1ztNiTKMpha46YUL1ghkrUKG9J2suXdNIjR/FCWgqggsVm3e7gpOVq/ oCBRhjig==; Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lkAC9-00HMfp-4b for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 18:48:26 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1621622902; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=RabyVfBo+mpfsjY1+7E6nJCVxTgd3EWR2ZAwlRxq+pc=; b=Y2IsRGNeZjn2kdz60/scONy4y8CaNQA/h36bJ16rReIjciHxN+rRM3Sxh52hNCoTAKP6Q4 mcez0/di82FyILM9MrkO408Qe/IaepD17CTpIkSNrzv2QPTI4kKmj6ctyEEHyADgwARm7i +9iMFbAkRZB+KbZJ/so33wBLmrlE+1M= Received: from mail-qt1-f200.google.com (mail-qt1-f200.google.com [209.85.160.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-136-f_ogWmolNBe_WS-1QFsEDA-1; Fri, 21 May 2021 14:48:20 -0400 X-MC-Unique: f_ogWmolNBe_WS-1QFsEDA-1 Received: by mail-qt1-f200.google.com with SMTP id h12-20020ac8776c0000b02901f1228fdb1bso12706531qtu.6 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 11:48:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=RabyVfBo+mpfsjY1+7E6nJCVxTgd3EWR2ZAwlRxq+pc=; b=dLHq3FXnYcbGbzn+amhQgxa882VRwqKfi9oJDN4j5yM+P1Wm4qklAUiMLViWrEQUv4 7nl1YFCf6V8mbD+2qaZrGTBMgoiY27znzU3neRz2hbOBUsAxtsklwkYBwd1zPBfsbBps nQbbd23pOBKNk/3WrzQltbitRHypcCrchLO0Hh+tMMD+BF87RB1WxLjcPNYLWqrLuhXo mG2LDMOj5fKVaq1AmsPJczTT3PSESupCCCtQ7wyvhiPx9f2c2cD8gj0Ex+7FVl1Yr0Hk u0mVe77p9ds5nVd4RwMQq9LGWc3VAChCfbSwS04mNyxvXl+iN7ZQF1CJy6a0KIgjbJZL YGsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532hDRoIb0tjWSNXIvktoKTsL3nu0o/0vy2U7EDD469LzxTkJzpk DdNeINzS2ffu+idk8MxzbaARZ93Zk8lDIiSzhUt8FV4/6rGfGMl9V4wCHLGh4cWGe20jA/Yo4jf GGcsZyeYrSAABu/H+/kfHMEpszv6s3Bc+1RI= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a751:: with SMTP id q78mr12984100qke.482.1621622900180; Fri, 21 May 2021 11:48:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxHUdKGd/QZYK8u/xAP/LmgxaXU5otdxg4YYZcyca15w45dlnEX1TLWZZcpl0Zm9M20jsvUSA== X-Received: by 2002:a37:a751:: with SMTP id q78mr12984080qke.482.1621622899919; Fri, 21 May 2021 11:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from treble ([68.52.236.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b17sm4762548qtb.78.2021.05.21.11.48.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 21 May 2021 11:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 13:48:17 -0500 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Mark Brown Cc: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" , mark.rutland@arm.com, ardb@kernel.org, jthierry@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder Message-ID: <20210521184817.envdg232b2aeyprt@treble> References: <68eeda61b3e9579d65698a884b26c8632025e503> <20210516040018.128105-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> <20210516040018.128105-2-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> <20210521161117.GB5825@sirena.org.uk> <20210521174242.GD5825@sirena.org.uk> <26c33633-029e-6374-16e6-e9418099da95@linux.microsoft.com> <20210521175318.GF5825@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210521175318.GF5825@sirena.org.uk> Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jpoimboe@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210521_114825_276057_AEC67819 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.72 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 06:53:18PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:47:13PM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote: > > On 5/21/21 12:42 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > Like I say we may come up with some use for the flag in error cases in > > > future so I'm not opposed to keeping the accounting there. > > > So, should I leave it the way it is now? Or should I not set reliable = false > > for errors? Which one do you prefer? > > > Josh, > > > Are you OK with not flagging reliable = false for errors in unwind_frame()? > > I think it's fine to leave it as it is. Either way works for me, but if you remove those 'reliable = false' statements for stack corruption then, IIRC, the caller would still have some confusion between the end of stack error (-ENOENT) and the other errors (-EINVAL). So the caller would have to know that -ENOENT really means success. Which, to me, seems kind of flaky. BTW, not sure if you've seen what we do in x86, but we have a 'frame->error' which gets set for an error, and which is cumulative across frames. So non-fatal reliable-type errors don't necessarily have to stop the unwind. The end result is the same as your patch, but it seems less confusing to me because the 'error' is cumulative. But that might be personal preference and I'd defer to the arm64 folks. -- Josh _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel