[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0810302241420.21031@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:43:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make ftrace able to trace function return
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker wrote:
> 2008/10/30 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>:
> > What about storing the return addresses on the bottom of the stack?
> > That is, start at task->stack + sizeof(thread_info), and stack up on that.
> > Be careful, there might already be users of that area. This will also need
> > to be arch dependent.
>
> But how could I assume there is enough space behind this address to store a long
> stack of functions calls for a same thread?
> And if an interrupt is raised, would a reference to "current task" be
> really consistant?
>
> I don't know much about the bottom stack of the tasks, I'm not sure
> about how much
> space I can use inside... I should study this field. Who could be the
> potential users of this area?
>
Because it is the real stack ;-)
Before adding, test to see if the real stack pointer is getting close. If
it is, then there's probably more issues. You can run the stack_tracer to
see how much stack is available too.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists