Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] arm64: ftrace: fix incorrect output from stack tracer

[AKASHI Takahiro]

On 10/29/2015 12:23 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 07:01:37PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > This is the third patch series for fixing stack tracer on arm64.
> > The original issue was reported by Jungseok[1], and then I found more
> > issues[2].
> > (Steven, Jungseok, sorry for not replying to your comments directly.)
> >
> > I address here all the issues and implement fixes described in [2] except
> > for interrupt-triggered problems, ie. II-3). Recent discussions[3] about
> > introducing a dedicated interrupt stack suggests that we may avoid walking
> > through from an interrupt stack to a process stack.
> > (So interrupt-stack patch is a prerequisite.)
> >
> > Basically,
> > patch1 corresponds to the original issue.
> > patch2 is a proactive improvement of function_graph tracer.
> > patch3 corresponds to II-4(functions under function_graph tracer).
> > patch4 corresponds to II-5(leaf function).
> > patch5, 6 and 7 correspond to II-1(slurping stack) and II-2(differences
> > between x86 and arm64).
> >
> > Each fix can be applied independently, but if patch5, 6 and 7 are
> > acceptable, patch1 is not necessary because patch7 replaces a default
> > stack tracer.
>
> Given the comments and kbuild robot build errors, do you plan to post a
> new version of this series?

Yes, I do.
Do you have any comments that I should address before submitting a new version?
Apart from build errors, I admit that I should drop patch #4 ("arm64: ftrace:
allow for tracing leaf functions") just because I was somewhat confused.
I confirmed that "-pg" option actually disables omit-leaf-stack-frame.

Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI

> Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/