From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754654AbbKBSl3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:41:29 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:52276 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754535AbbKBSl0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:41:26 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:41:24 +0000 From: Will Deacon To: Mark Rutland Cc: Steven Rostedt , jungseoklee85@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, AKASHI Takahiro , broonie@kernel.org, david.griego@linaro.org, olof@lixom.net, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] arm64: ftrace: adjust callsite addresses examined by stack tracer Message-ID: <20151102184124.GO29657@arm.com> References: <1446182741-31019-1-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <1446182741-31019-2-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <20151030111618.GA20030@arm.com> <20151102132043.060ef31d@gandalf.local.home> <20151102182928.GJ2684@leverpostej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151102182928.GJ2684@leverpostej> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 06:29:28PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 01:20:43PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:16:19 +0000 > > Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 02:25:36PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > > On arm64, no PC values returned by save_stack_trace() will match to LR > > > > values saved in stack frames on a stack after the following commit: > > > > commit e306dfd06fcb ("ARM64: unwind: Fix PC calculation") > > > > As a result, the output from stack tracer will be messed up. > > > > > > FWIW, we've decided to revert that patch for the moment. We're the only > > > architecture making that kind of adjustment, so we should fix that before > > > building on top of it. > > > > > > > > > > What is the status of this patch set. I'm currently pulling in last > > minute patches for 4.3 and should the ftrace patch in this series be > > applied? (I still need to review it too). > > The revert Will mentioned is in v4.3 (see commit 9702970c7bd3e2d6), so > this series needs a respin to account for that. Right, but we're talking about the core ftrace change in patch 4, which is (afaict) independent of the commit you mention above. Will