Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-20 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:39:13PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 06:41:55PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 01:15:34PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > Ah, I'd have interpreted "defined thread entry point" as meaning > > > expecting to find specific fu

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-20 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:03:52AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:14:31PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > Mark B's reply dropped this, but the next paragraph covered that: > > > > | I was planning to send a mail once I've finished writing a test, but > > | IIUC there are so

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-20 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 06:41:55PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 01:15:34PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Ah, I'd have interpreted "defined thread entry point" as meaning > > expecting to find specific functions appering at the end of the stack > > rather than meaning posit

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-20 Thread Mark Rutland
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:14:31PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > Mark B's reply dropped this, but the next paragraph covered that: > > | I was planning to send a mail once I've finished writing a test, but > | IIUC there are some windows where ftrace/kretprobes > | detection/repainting may not work

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-19 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 01:15:34PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Yes, exactly - just copying the existing implementations and hoping that > it's sensible/relevant and covers everything that's needed. It's not > entirely clear what a reliable stacktrace is expected to do that a > normal stacktrace

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-16 Thread Mark Brown
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > I can't see the original patch. Can the original poster (Mark B?) add > me to Cc on the next version? https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20201012172605.10715-1-broo...@kernel.org/ > It's also good practice to add lkml as wel

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-16 Thread Mark Rutland
Hi Josh, On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > AFAICT, existing architectures don't always handle all of the above in > > > arch_stack_walk_reliable(). For example, it looks like x86 assumes > > > unwiding through exceptions is reliable for !CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, bu

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

2020-10-15 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
I can't see the original patch. Can the original poster (Mark B?) add me to Cc on the next version? It's also good practice to add lkml as well. That way, those of us not copied can at least find the patch in the archives. live-patch...@vger.kernel.org would also be a good idea for this one. O