From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751323AbdJDJXS (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2017 05:23:18 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:43895 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751161AbdJDJXR (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2017 05:23:17 -0400 From: Jiri Slaby To: mingo@redhat.com Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Slaby , Josh Poimboeuf Subject: [RFC 1/1] orc: mark it as reliable Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:23:15 +0200 Message-Id: <20171004092315.17129-1-jslaby@suse.cz> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.14.2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org We need a reliable stack unwinder for kernel live patching, but we do not want to enable frame pointers for performance reasons. So let ORC be a reliable stack unwinder on x86 as it performs nicely wrt reliability of traces. Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby Cc: Josh Poimboeuf Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: x86@kernel.org --- I am sending this as an RFC. Do you still consider ORC to be not-enough reliable? arch/x86/Kconfig | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig index 063f1e0d51aa..7403267407fc 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig @@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ config X86 select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE select HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API - select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE if X86_64 && FRAME_POINTER_UNWINDER && STACK_VALIDATION + select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE if X86_64 && (FRAME_POINTER_UNWINDER || ORC_UNWINDER) && STACK_VALIDATION select HAVE_STACK_VALIDATION if X86_64 select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS select HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK -- 2.14.2