[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1267298703.6328.181.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 14:25:03 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][GIT PULL] ftrace: Add function names to dangling } in
function graph tracer
On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 11:02 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > /*
> > * Comments display at + 1 to depth. Since
> > * this is a leaf function, keep the comments
> > * equal to this depth.
> > */
> > - *depth = call->depth - 1;
> > + cpu_data->depth = call->depth - 1;
> > +
> > + /* No need to keep this function around for this depth */
> > + if (call->depth < FTRACE_RETFUNC_DEPTH)
>
>
>
> Do you really need to check that? call->depth >= FTRACE_RETFUNC_DEPTH
> are not recorded.
>
>
Call me paranoid, but working inside the kernel makes me paranoid. If
for some reason a trace gets corrupted here, not doing this check can
cause a kernel oops.
>
> > + cpu_data->enter_funcs[call->depth] = 0;
cpu_data->enter_funcs[102340320211] = 0;
would be bad ;-)
Hmm, I should also make sure depth is not less than zero. I'll send a
new patch to do that 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