Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: unwind: improve unwinders for noreturn case

[Russell King (Oracle)]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 10:22:30AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> How aggressively does the compiler optimise 'noreturn' functions?

I've seen cases where the compiler emits a BL instruction as the very
last thing in the function, and nothing after it.

This is where the problem lies - because the link register value
created by the BL instruction will point to the instruction after the
BL which will _not_ part of the function that invoked the BL. That
will probably cause issues for the ELF unwinder, which means this
issue probably goes beyond _just_ printing the function name.

I have vague memories that Ard has been involved in the unwinder,
maybe he could comment on this problem? Maybe we need the unwinder
itself to do the correction? I also wonder whether we should only
do the correction if we detect that we're pointing at the first
instruction of a function, and the previous instruction in the
text segment was a BL.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!