Re: C aggregate passing (Rust kernel policy)

[David Laight]

On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 12:47:33 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 12:41:30 -0500
> Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > It's been awhile since I've looked at one, I've been just automatically
> > switching back to frame pointers for awhile, but - I never saw
> > inaccurate backtraces, just failure to generate a backtrace - if memory
> > serves.  
> 
> OK, maybe if the bug was bad enough, it couldn't get access to the ORC
> tables for some reason. Not having a backtrace on crash is not as bad as
> incorrect back traces, as the former is happening when the system is dieing
> and live kernel patching doesn't help with that.

I bet to differ.
With no backtrace you have absolutely no idea what happened.
A list of 'code addresses on the stack' (named as such) can be enough
to determine the call sequence.
Although to be really helpful you need a hexdump of the actual stack
and the stack addresses of each 'code address'.

	David