[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150105140754.GF29390@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:07:54 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
秦承刚(承刚)
<chenggang.qcg@...baba-inc.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
root <chenggang.qin@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
秦承刚(承刚) <chenggang.qcg@...bao.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Yanmin Zhang <yanmin.zhang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: Move task_pt_regs sampling into arch code
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 10:36:19AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On x86_64, at least, task_pt_regs may be only partially initialized
> in many contexts, so x86_64 should not use it without extra care
> from interrupt context, let alone NMI context.
>
> This will allow x86_64 to override the logic and will supply some
> scratch space to use to make a cleaner copy of user regs.
Just wondering how bad it would be to fill out the actual pt_regs that
was previously partially initialized?
--
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