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=-5.2 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,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 825F3C433E7 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:14:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (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 EF3FF20848 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:14:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="ZLuNGbHq" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EF3FF20848 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz 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=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: Subject: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=l2GSo1/K029GgmE5ogq/RxRdPiYZuEwlAhH/BiYhgXk=; b=ZLuNGbHqKqJyWumRm9zYcqhN/ MGWW+v7KPM6MeN2cg35nzMk48qhgs8gO2mnlTa9TDOc0HYtE28D8ERA+x1qAiqvZThUwLHtcVT1pN 53dAweK6tJozes1yJNVmUWPOXXJcHRiZ3u+VzXAzmID4uSZuCv6OhKn/IeS03dcvM9WN5+TPMO75m IOzPWIZN7entkZRVgHJMu9OYACeVaJFciccVnAODv4ISt4XUCx90WAoxZUfITtts8wimjlxdWY32L Z/3nKqF4V1kJSt1teXu2w3oPAQijsgVVJ/TLqvnW8s/9gQ2VJdYehLWaDgD2OC+kveZxFprBeXHGN JsqkZOA1w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kTMje-0005ST-UW; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:13:18 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kTMjc-0005Rv-GL for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:13:17 +0000 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE08AAE93; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:13:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:13:14 +0200 (CEST) From: Miroslav Benes To: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] arm64: stacktrace: Implement reliable stacktrace In-Reply-To: <20201015155756.GE4390@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <20201012172605.10715-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20201012172605.10715-4-broonie@kernel.org> <20201015155756.GE4390@sirena.org.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LSU 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201016_061316_669552_F40C93D0 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 16.77 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 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 Thu, 15 Oct 2020, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 03:33:44PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote: > > > I think it would be nice to check if frame.pc is a valid text address here > > before it is consumed next. > > I'm wondering if it might be better to do have the generic code do this > in consume_entry() or something, it doesn't seem arch specific? Maybe. There is currently no special consume_entry() for the reliable interface, but I think there is no reason not to introduce one. On the other hand, both x86 and s390x currently solve it in unwind_get_return_address() which is a part of the unwinding infrastructure and it would not fit well with the above. powerpc solves it independently in __save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() loop, which does not use consume_entry() and new stuff at all. So I don't know if it is worth it. Miroslav _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel