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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 AB7F6C31E50 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 23:23:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833342184B for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 23:23:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="WisDtLLc" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726692AbfFNXX4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 19:23:56 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com ([209.85.208.195]:38084 "EHLO mail-lj1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725825AbfFNXX4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 19:23:56 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id r9so3959517ljg.5; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:23:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pDUDSK7aY+fziRLTyE5gQ/97uoVyficveK+IhkDVU/s=; b=WisDtLLcc9fBrSNTwajji89OE8JpSP3EnNg0ovjwNHxtLQeWB1mkqn+0jjNgrww67l 5bj7DQ4F656ArFMX4vRbtsRU47PW9DvU27E5AcI33LlN87bpO6CI9dQlu1bqBVvmxsmG rP78nN+1YdkrMtA5Ym9mAeqHccUK/WFg1+NxNFxz/GRxuG4qksXKLkhufMXYKTMaDUfs heny44h88kewMJFu+q3OaNCFcvdoxFQVd6AFt+dODurKz+PdHAT3p7TS/Eh7+n/oD2/n DmKthDe3Rzkl0rcbF7REB7QE1ezbbwHywvC2QjSeyQwJmikLjm7787fvrAT8Sl0Y+AWW 2Bbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pDUDSK7aY+fziRLTyE5gQ/97uoVyficveK+IhkDVU/s=; b=m3a9aJw5P5n8bmK17Pq+qsx656tJotTtQH7tkRnMC9WFET9gduYf5YZJUEEe27gDH1 kHqx51KlfQAZD4QnPI77PnSPmPXOhCpnFt3kXh3ckoi04Zfu8WmPjF/IAxUCfn4gqraD IsGTeCIY56p3sk/XHceczqtw54rz/AwVQc/G79OPjePwqREbpcMVzereaq0SSlfLx14o gslkvKdk4PBwm+L2a5RnI+Tn6R91o9lFmmEhvvoFo3/qtD4sh+qX0T3cZHsh3VIK/+2P TWgxpwv3O/gdb6JIcMWUjzXYPxt4iUorNfktVN0e1n9qdzVvfVOQWkxekN/uXvXIPkqZ c7OA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXeX0ANGBde1Bli9ovUkqTzkcXC69btXiZDkIfyjXNUp9JnITjm ePyPNL794YMgK/UqZz7RqDubiS3ilQlDRCVzYBQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwzsrM06S59JVQf6DjWTNnsTo2H3EA3pcRq1Q7xqDC81psVMJwwepWv85hR4eAb6Wu4ESaQNKKyjMB2Kifj7dI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a311:: with SMTP id l17mr31760132lje.214.1560554633648; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:23:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <178097de8c1bd6a877342304f3469eac4067daa4.1560534694.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com> <20190614210555.q4ictql3tzzjio4r@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20190614211916.jnxakyfwilcv6r57@treble> <20190614231311.gfeb47rpjoholuov@treble> In-Reply-To: <20190614231311.gfeb47rpjoholuov@treble> From: Alexei Starovoitov Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:23:41 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] x86/bpf: Fix 64-bit JIT frame pointer usage To: Josh Poimboeuf Cc: X86 ML , Alexei Starovoitov , LKML , Daniel Borkmann , Network Development , bpf , Peter Zijlstra , Song Liu , Kairui Song , Steven Rostedt , David Laight , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:13 PM Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 02:27:30PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:19 PM Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 02:05:56PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > > > Have you tested it ? > > > > I really doubt, since in my test both CONFIG_UNWINDER_ORC and > > > > CONFIG_UNWINDER_FRAME_POINTER failed to unwind through such odd frame. > > > > > > Hm, are you seeing selftest failures? They seem to work for me. > > > > > > > Here is much simple patch that I mentioned in the email yesterday, > > > > but you failed to listen instead of focusing on perceived 'code readability'. > > > > > > > > It makes one proper frame and both frame and orc unwinders are happy. > > > > > > I'm on my way out the door and I just skimmed it, but it looks fine. > > > > > > Some of the code and patch description look familiar, please be sure to > > > give me proper credit. > > > > credit means something positive. > > So you only give credit for *good* stolen code. I must have missed that > section of the kernel patch guidelines. what are you talking about? you've posted one bad patch. I pointed out multiple issues in it. Then proposed another bad idea. I pointed out another set of issues. Than David proposed yet another idea that you've implemented and claimed that it's working when it was not. Then I got fed up with this thread and fix it for real by reverting that old commit that I mentioned way earlier. https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1116307/ Where do you see your code or ideas being used? I see none.