linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][GIT PULL] trace,x86: Move creation of irq tracepoints from apic.c to irq.c

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:28:11 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][GIT PULL] trace,x86: Move creation of irq tracepoints
 from apic.c to irq.c

On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:13 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/21/2013 02:09 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Call Trace:
> >  [<ffffffff8103539d>] do_fork+0xa8/0x260
> >  [<ffffffff810ca7b1>] ? trace_preempt_on+0x2a/0x2f
> >  [<ffffffff812afb3e>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
> 
> This bit of the call chain seems a little odd, no?

Doesn't the "?" mean its just in the stack but not part of the call
frame that was used. CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is set in the config.

With lockdep and preempt tracing enabled, why would this seem strange?

-- 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/