[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150812150232.GI23540@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:02:32 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@...il.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Add __exception_irq_entry definition for function
graph
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 03:16:19PM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> The gic_handle_irq() is defined with __exception_irq_entry attribute.
> A single remaining work is to add its definition as ARM did. Below
> shows how function graph data is changed with these hunks.
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/traps.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/traps.h
> index 232e4ba..0cc2f29 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/traps.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/traps.h
> @@ -34,13 +34,32 @@ struct undef_hook {
> void register_undef_hook(struct undef_hook *hook);
> void unregister_undef_hook(struct undef_hook *hook);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> +static inline int __in_irqentry_text(unsigned long ptr)
> +{
> + extern char __irqentry_text_start[];
> + extern char __irqentry_text_end[];
> +
> + return ptr >= (unsigned long)&__irqentry_text_start &&
> + ptr < (unsigned long)&__irqentry_text_end;
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline int __in_irqentry_text(unsigned long ptr)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> static inline int in_exception_text(unsigned long ptr)
> {
> extern char __exception_text_start[];
> extern char __exception_text_end[];
> + int in;
> +
> + in = ptr >= (unsigned long)&__exception_text_start &&
> + ptr < (unsigned long)&__exception_text_end;
>
> - return ptr >= (unsigned long)&__exception_text_start &&
> - ptr < (unsigned long)&__exception_text_end;
> + return in ? : __in_irqentry_text(ptr);
> }
On arm64, this function is only called from dump_backtrace, so I'm
struggling to see why this change makes any difference to the ftrace
output.
What am I missing?
Will
--
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