[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100228181622.GB5248@nowhere>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:16:27 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
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, Feb 27, 2010 at 02:25:03PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 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.
Ok but this may also hide a bug.
Could it be a WARN_ON_ONCE?
> >
> > > + 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.
With a WARN_ON_ONCE? :)
Thanks.
--
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