From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2495F30CF3; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 13:48:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=none Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9E55C433C7; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 13:48:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2023 08:48:44 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Alexei Starovoitov , Florent Revest , linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Martin KaFai Lau , bpf , Sven Schnelle , Alexei Starovoitov , Jiri Olsa , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Daniel Borkmann , Alan Maguire , Mark Rutland , Thomas Gleixner , Guo Ren Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 24/32] x86/ftrace: Enable HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_FREGS Message-ID: <20231107084844.7a39ac3f@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20231107144328.cc763a2a137391ceb105e9db@kernel.org> References: <169920038849.482486.15796387219966662967.stgit@devnote2> <169920068069.482486.6540417903833579700.stgit@devnote2> <20231105172536.GA7124@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20231105141130.6ef7d8bd@rorschach.local.home> <20231105231734.GE3818@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20231105183301.38be5598@rorschach.local.home> <20231106100549.33f6ce30d968906979ca3954@kernel.org> <20231106113710.3bf69211@gandalf.local.home> <20231107094258.d41a46c202197e92bc6d9656@kernel.org> <20231106220617.5eb73f2f@gandalf.local.home> <20231107144328.cc763a2a137391ceb105e9db@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.19.1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 14:43:28 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote: > > > > It's only needed if an architecture supports direct trampolines. > > I see, and x86_64 needs it. > OK, maybe better to keep it clear on x86-64 even on the > return handler. As it is arch specific, I'm not sure it matters for the return handler, as the return should never call a direct trampoline. -- Steve