From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>,
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
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 13:48:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210521184817.envdg232b2aeyprt@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210521175318.GF5825@sirena.org.uk>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 18:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <68eeda61b3e9579d65698a884b26c8632025e503>
2021-05-16 4:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] arm64: Stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder madvenka
2021-05-16 4:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] arm64: Introduce stack " madvenka
2021-05-21 16:11 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-21 17:23 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-21 17:42 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-21 17:47 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-21 17:53 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-21 18:48 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2021-05-21 18:59 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-21 19:11 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-05-21 19:16 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-05-21 19:41 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-21 20:08 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-05-25 21:44 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-16 4:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, blacklist them " madvenka
2021-05-19 2:06 ` nobuta.keiya
2021-05-19 3:38 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-19 19:27 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-20 2:00 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-21 17:18 ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] arm64: Stack trace reliability checks " Mark Brown
2021-05-21 17:32 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-05-21 17:47 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-21 17:48 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210521184817.envdg232b2aeyprt@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=jthierry@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).