From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756587AbbJ2FYp (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:24:45 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.220.44]:34624 "EHLO mail-pa0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750822AbbJ2FYn (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:24:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] arm64: ftrace: fix incorrect output from stack tracer To: Will Deacon References: <1444298504-10392-1-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <20151028152344.GG18966@arm.com> Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, jungseoklee85@gmail.com, olof@lixom.net, broonie@kernel.org, david.griego@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: AKASHI Takahiro Message-ID: <5631AD94.4010304@linaro.org> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:24:36 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151028152344.GG18966@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/29/2015 12:23 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 07:01:37PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: >> This is the third patch series for fixing stack tracer on arm64. >> The original issue was reported by Jungseok[1], and then I found more >> issues[2]. >> (Steven, Jungseok, sorry for not replying to your comments directly.) >> >> I address here all the issues and implement fixes described in [2] except >> for interrupt-triggered problems, ie. II-3). Recent discussions[3] about >> introducing a dedicated interrupt stack suggests that we may avoid walking >> through from an interrupt stack to a process stack. >> (So interrupt-stack patch is a prerequisite.) >> >> Basically, >> patch1 corresponds to the original issue. >> patch2 is a proactive improvement of function_graph tracer. >> patch3 corresponds to II-4(functions under function_graph tracer). >> patch4 corresponds to II-5(leaf function). >> patch5, 6 and 7 correspond to II-1(slurping stack) and II-2(differences >> between x86 and arm64). >> >> Each fix can be applied independently, but if patch5, 6 and 7 are >> acceptable, patch1 is not necessary because patch7 replaces a default >> stack tracer. > > Given the comments and kbuild robot build errors, do you plan to post a > new version of this series? Yes, I do. Do you have any comments that I should address before submitting a new version? Apart from build errors, I admit that I should drop patch #4 ("arm64: ftrace: allow for tracing leaf functions") just because I was somewhat confused. I confirmed that "-pg" option actually disables omit-leaf-stack-frame. Thanks, -Takahiro AKASHI > Will >