On Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 1:54 PM Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote: > > hi, > sending fix for ORC stack unwind issue reported in here [1], where > the ORC unwinder won't go pass the return_to_handler function and > we get no stacktrace. > > Sending fix for that together with unrelated stacktrace fix (patch 1), > so the attached test can work properly. > > It's based on: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace.git > probes/for-next > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]/ > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]/ > > v3 changes: > - fix assert condition in test > > thanks, > jirka > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/aObSyt3qOnS_BMcy@krava/ > --- > Jiri Olsa (4): > Revert "perf/x86: Always store regs->ip in perf_callchain_kernel()" > x86/fgraph,bpf: Fix stack ORC unwind from kprobe_multi return probe > selftests/bpf: Add stacktrace ips test for kprobe_multi/kretprobe_multi > selftests/bpf: Add stacktrace ips test for raw_tp > > arch/x86/events/core.c | 10 +++---- > arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h | 5 ++++ > arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_64.S | 8 +++++- > include/linux/ftrace.h | 10 ++++++- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/stacktrace_ips.c | 150 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/stacktrace_ips.c | 49 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod.c | 26 > +++++++++++++++++ > 7 files changed, 251 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/stacktrace_ips.c > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/stacktrace_ips.c
Steven, Peter, How should we route this? If you take it into your tree, please send it to Linus right away, so we can pull it into bpf/bpf-next trees. The conflicts in selftests/bpf in the last merge window were annoying. I don't want to see a repeat.
