From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752116AbaAGOmO (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2014 09:42:14 -0500 Received: from gw-1.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.217]:58256 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751743AbaAGOlt (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2014 09:41:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 14:41:30 +0000 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sahara , Keun-O Park , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt , Dave Martin Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/19] [INCOMPLETE] ARM: make return_address available for ARM_UNWIND Message-ID: <20140107144130.GJ27432@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1359123276-15833-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <20130128125023.GA2027@linaro.org> <201401071533.35309.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201401071533.35309.arnd@arndb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 03:33:34PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 29 January 2013, Keun-O Park wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Dave Martin wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:33:11AM +0900, Keun-O Park wrote: > > >> Hello guys, > > >> > > >> Could you please review the patch of fixing bug first of returning > > >> wrong address when using frame pointer? > > >> I am wondering if the first patch is not delivered to the mailing. > > > > > > I posted a similar patch to alkml a couple of months ago, but I got > > > no response and it looks like I forgot about it. > > > > > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-November/129381.html > > > > Yes, same except initialization of data.addr. :) > > This means there might be no one interested in using > > ftrace-irqsoff/premptoff in ARM during a couple of months? > > > It's been almost a year since we last discussed the patches that were > posted by Dave and sahara, but nothing has changed in the mainline kernel. > > Any chance that someone could be motivated to pick this work up again > and finally fix return_address(). I thought that we had _actively_ decided that we would not use the unwinder for these paths - that it was too expensive for these paths, and you had to use frame pointers instead. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: 5.8Mbps down 500kbps up. Estimation in database were 13.1 to 19Mbit for a good line, about 7.5+ for a bad. Estimate before purchase was "up to 13.2Mbit".