On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 16:48:01 +0000
Russell King - ARM Linux <li...@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 10:19:25AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Jan 2015 14:54:58 +0000
> > Daniel Thompson <daniel.thomp...@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > +/* For reliability, we're prepared to waste bits here. */
> > > +static DECLARE_BITMAP(backtrace_mask, NR_CPUS) __read_mostly;
> > > +static cpumask_t printtrace_mask;
> > > +
> > > +#define NMI_BUF_SIZE 4096
> > > +
> > > +struct nmi_seq_buf {
> > > + unsigned char buffer[NMI_BUF_SIZE];
> > > + struct seq_buf seq;
> > > +};
>
> Am I missing something or does this limit us to 4096 characters of
> backtrace output per CPU?
>
> > This is the same code as in x86. I wonder if we should move the
> > duplicate code into kernel/printk/ and have it compiled if the arch
> > requests it (CONFIG_ARCH_WANT_NMI_PRINTK or something). That way we
> > don't have 20 copies of the same nmi_vprintk() and later find that we
> > need to change it, and have to change it in 20 different archs.
>
> Agreed, though I wonder about the buffer size.
>
Have we had kernel back traces bigger than that? Since the stack size
is limited to page size, it would seem dangerous if backtraces filled
up a page size itself, as most function frames are bigger than the
typical 60 bytes of data per line.
We could change that hard coded 4096 to PAGE_SIZE, for those archs with
bigger pages.
Also, if the backtrace were to fill up that much. Most the pertinent
data from a back trace is at the beginning of the trace. Seldom do we
care about the top most callers (bottom of the output).
-- Steve
--
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/
