Re: [PATCH] ftrace: cover new frame pointer semantics
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Fri Jan 22 2010 - 09:45:54 EST
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 08:12 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> Update the graph tracer examples to cover the new frame pointer semantics
> (in terms of passing it along). Move the HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_FP_TEST docs
> out of the Kconfig, into the right place, and expand on the details.
> Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks! I'll queue this up for 34. and maybe 33 if there's a fix that is
needed. Not sure if Doc only changes can still make 33, if so, I may
send this patch by itself.
> Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.txt | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> kernel/trace/Kconfig | 4 +---
> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.txt b/Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.txt
> index 239f14b..6a5a579 100644
> --- a/Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.txt
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> function tracer guts
> + By Mike Frysinger
> @@ -173,14 +174,16 @@ void ftrace_graph_caller(void)
> unsigned long *frompc = &...;
> unsigned long selfpc = <return address> - MCOUNT_INSN_SIZE;
> - prepare_ftrace_return(frompc, selfpc);
> + /* passing frame pointer up is optional -- see below */
> + prepare_ftrace_return(frompc, selfpc, frame_pointer);
> /* restore all state needed by the ABI */
> -For information on how to implement prepare_ftrace_return(), simply look at
> -the x86 version. The only architecture-specific piece in it is the setup of
> +For information on how to implement prepare_ftrace_return(), simply look at the
> +x86 version (the frame pointer passing is optional; see the next section for
> +more information). The only architecture-specific piece in it is the setup of
> the fault recovery table (the asm(...) code). The rest should be the same
> across architectures.
> @@ -205,6 +208,23 @@ void return_to_handler(void)
> +An arch may pass in a unique value (frame pointer) to both the entering and
> +exiting of a function. On exit, the value is compared and if it does not
> +match, then it will panic the kernel. This is largely a sanity check for bad
> +code generation with gcc. If gcc for your port sanely updates the frame
> +pointer under different opitmization levels, then ignore this option.
> +However, adding support for it isn't terribly difficult. In your assembly code
> +that calls prepare_ftrace_return(), pass the frame pointer as the 3rd argument.
> +Then in the C version of that function, do what the x86 port does and pass it
> +along to ftrace_push_return_trace() instead of a stub value of 0.
> +Similarly, when you call ftrace_return_to_handler(), pass it the frame pointer.
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/Kconfig b/kernel/trace/Kconfig
> index 6c22d8a..60e2ce0 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/Kconfig
> +++ b/kernel/trace/Kconfig
> @@ -27,9 +27,7 @@ config HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> config HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_FP_TEST
> - An arch may pass in a unique value (frame pointer) to both the
> - entering and exiting of a function. On exit, the value is compared
> - and if it does not match, then it will panic the kernel.
> + See Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.txt
> config HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACE_MCOUNT_TEST
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/