Re: [PATCH] arm:traps: Don't print stack or raw PC/LR values in backtraces - Russell King

From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: wangle6@huawei.com, walken@google.com, amanieu@gmail.com,
	dima@arista.com, Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@huawei.com>,
	vincent.whitchurch@axis.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mingo@kernel.org, ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk, tglx@linutronix.de,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jpoimboe@redhat.com,
	luohaizheng@huawei.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	ldufour@linux.ibm.com, will@kernel.org,
	christian.brauner@ubuntu.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm:traps: Don't print stack or raw PC/LR values in backtraces
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:06:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201012110643.GO1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201012100318.4ikyffo3mcnq6bnl@linutronix.de>

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:03:18PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2020-10-11 22:32:38 [+0100], Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > I don't have a problem getting rid of the hex numbers in [< >]
> > although then I will need to convert the symbol back to an address
> > using the vmlinux to then calculate its address to then find the
> > appropriate place in the objdump output - because objdump does
> > _not_ use the symbol+offset annotation.  Yes, I really do look up
> > the numeric addresses in the objdump output to then read the
> > disassembly.
> > 
> > $ objdump -d vmlinux | less
> > 
> > and then search for the address is the fastest and most convenient
> > way for me rather than having to deal with some random script.
> > 
> > Maybe I'm just antequated about how I do my debugging, but this
> > seems to me to be the most efficient and fastest way.
> 
> besides what Josh mentioned, there is also 
>          scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh path-vmlinux
>  
> where you can copy/paste your complete stack trace / dmesg and it will
> decode it line by line. So if you invoke
>         scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh vmlinux.o
> 
> and paste this:
> 
> |[    7.568155] 001: PC is at do_work_pending+0x190/0x5c4
> |[    7.568641] 001: LR is at slow_work_pending+0xc/0x20
> |[    7.569232] 001: Backtrace:
> |[    7.569367] 001: [<c020c2d0>] (do_work_pending) from [<c02000cc>] (slow_work_pending+0xc/0x20)
> 
> you get this in return:
> |[    7.568155] 001: PC is at do_work_pending (arch/arm/kernel/signal.c:616 arch/arm/kernel/signal.c:670)
> |[    7.568641] 001: LR is at slow_work_pending (arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S:112)
> |[    7.569232] 001: Backtrace:
> |[    7.569367] 001: (do_work_pending) from slow_work_pending (arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S:112)

That's assuming:

1) you have built the kernel with debug information enabled
   (I never do, it uses way too much disk space)
2) you want to look at the C code rather than the assembly.

I think you've assumed that I debug oopses by looking primerily at C
code. I don't. I understand the assembly and then look at the C code.

I've stated in the past in detail how I debug the kernel when someone
has posted a hard-to-debug oops, going through the validation of the
dumped state, sometimes to find the bug in a function several parents
up from the one where the oops actually occurred.

However, as I've said, I have little problem removing the hex values
inside [< >] as I can work around that. Removing the other information
is what I'm objecting to.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel