Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder

Mark Brown
2021-05-21T17:53:27Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 503 bytes --]

On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:47:13PM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote:
> On 5/21/21 12:42 PM, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Like I say we may come up with some use for the flag in error cases in
> > future so I'm not opposed to keeping the accounting there.

> So, should I leave it the way it is now? Or should I not set reliable = false
> for errors? Which one do you prefer?

> Josh,

> Are you OK with not flagging reliable = false for errors in unwind_frame()?

I think it's fine to leave it as it is.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]