On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:32:39PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> writes: > > One of the users of this is __kernel_text_address() which is employed in > > many stack unwinders; which in turn are used by perf-callchain (possibly > > from NMI context). > > Um, so the stack unwinders use "does this look like a kernel address" > because we omit the frame pointer?
Not only because of that I think; also as a general robustness check. I'm not sure people want their stack unwinder to go off into the woods. > To keep that optimization, we add 220 non-trivial lines to module.c? Can I make you feel better by writing more comments? I'm not sure we can convince the arch people to take this test out. Its all over the place. > Don't get me wrong, it's cute code, but I do wonder if at some point a > grown up is going to come along and tell us to stop :) Now where's the fun in that ;-) -- 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/
