Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] arm64: ftrace: add arch-specific stack tracer

[AKASHI Takahiro]

Jungseok,

On 11/01/2015 05:30 PM, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> On Oct 30, 2015, at 2:25 PM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
>
> Hi Akashi,
>
> > Stack tracer on arm64, check_stack(), is uniqeue in the following
> > points:
> > * analyze a function prologue of a traced function to estimate a more
> >   accurate stack pointer value, replacing naive '<child's fp> + 0x10.'
> > * use walk_stackframe(), instead of slurping stack contents as orignal
> >   check_stack() does, to identify a stack frame and a stack index (height)
> >   for every callsite.
> >
> > Regarding a function prologue analyzer, there is no guarantee that we can
> > handle all the possible patterns of function prologue as gcc does not use
> > any fixed templates to generate them. 'Instruction scheduling' is another
> > issue here.
> > Nevertheless, the current version will surely cover almost all the cases
> > in the kernel image and give us useful information on stack pointers.
>
> Can I get an idea on how to test the function prologue analyzer? It pretty
> tough to compare stack trace data with objdump one. Is there an easier way
> to observe this enhancement without objdump?

It is quite difficult to give an evidence of the correctness of my function
prologue analyzer. I only checked the outputs from stack tracer, one by one
(every function), by comparing it against its disassembled code.

Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI

> Best Regards
> Jungseok Lee
--
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/