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=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 AB89CC4707F for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 21:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 73634613C0 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 21:45:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 73634613C0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.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=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=vAvExb+NXYRSljaFkeI/8aJszvc7tkezuene7DIVW2Y=; b=0M5+53Fe9ztr35YniPA/0AphLp jUMk9Tlw0c5i77UtsEgUj9vzW0wzQ3aKi1RCNyOpkIU1b6Z4F5puiZieb/j+zTcOoVzkSRmIdrE9r ZcnCMQTv7t1j2YRsKvhwEWlDNIwVMCvqu0XTXUhQlBm/mJ19YJbHlWjm1t5bK+JN9k6FvuR65LaZt 1xxadWrL0zNVN9fJ2Iktq3jYk9S61u/45NbM9LXdc8jk9NRJ+7WTCIfdN84rb0vcgDpJ9TrB3+1da 76V40KHRbdvsOhdrnqiishvsgE/rd4KxBJTtaFPHgMIn/zREku+sZBQtFqnLAMNlSKfPdR5ckBw/2 SVVPn+gw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ller5-008YDn-CF; Tue, 25 May 2021 21:44:51 +0000 Received: from linux.microsoft.com ([13.77.154.182]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ller1-008YBu-4j for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 25 May 2021 21:44:48 +0000 Received: from [192.168.254.32] (unknown [47.187.214.213]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E49AC20B7178; Tue, 25 May 2021 14:44:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com E49AC20B7178 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1621979085; bh=xNF+N2LJWV8nwWOJm1bYsEtpnJX3GGsqwoncmJEKa0E=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Uqo5qnXPyulwX2at001SEAKO9KxFLXfTtq/SlfdCOzqZfnYtByBcJ/yxxwyX488hi Nz6n8J9n/Km5blOVu+oseJsqCdWr4NgVOuHCWF1DPe3aKVSSubajbvqX0HAAtCwuMx NaSlCpCrZf6Cs4Ble18bydy9gxnNG5q4IaWzHckM= Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder To: Mark Brown Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, jpoimboe@redhat.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 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> From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" Message-ID: <7f9366bd-1973-bc07-5314-45792f256dc1@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 16:44:44 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210521175318.GF5825@sirena.org.uk> Content-Language: en-US X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210525_144447_309851_98235AF0 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.85 ) 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 5/21/21 12:53 PM, 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. > OK. I will address the comments so far and send out v5. Thanks. Madhavan _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel