On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:21:09PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 12:50:02PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 12:30:09PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 09:37:51AM -0800, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > > FRAME_POINTER is defined in lib/Kconfig.debug, it is unnecessary to 
> > > > redefine
> > > > it in arch/arm64/Kconfig.debug.
> > > 
> > > It might be worth noting that this adds a dependency on DEBUG_KERNEL
> > > for building with frame pointers. I'm ok with that (it appears to be
> > > enabled in defconfig and follows the vast majority of other archs) but
> > > it is a change in behaviour.
> > > 
> > > With that:
> > > 
> > >   Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>
> > 
> > The code in arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c assumes we have frame
> > pointers regardless of FRAME_POINTER. Depending on what the compiler
> > decides to use x29 for, we could get some weird fake unwinding and/or
> > dodgy memory accesses.
> > 
> > I think we should first audit the uses of frame pointers to ensure that
> > they are guarded for !FRAME_POINTER.
> 
> Or we just select FRAME_POINTER in the ARM64 Kconfig entry.

Yang, did you see any benefit disabling frame pointers, or was this patch
purely based on you spotting a duplicate Kconfig entry?

Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to