[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6277407.jveniKQDxt@wuerfel>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:46:16 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Li Bin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, zhouchengming1@...wei.com,
xiexiuqi@...wei.com, dingtianhong@...wei.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, guohanjun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: ftrace: function_graph: dump real return addr in call trace
On Thursday 15 October 2015 20:12:35 Li Bin wrote:
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> +static void print_ftrace_graph_addr(unsigned long addr,
> + struct task_struct *tsk,
> + unsigned long sp, int *graph)
> +{
> + unsigned long ret_addr;
> + int index = tsk->curr_ret_stack;
> +
> + if (addr != ((unsigned long)return_to_handler - 4))
> + return;
> +
> + if (!tsk->ret_stack || index < *graph)
>
I think it would be nicer to remove the #ifdef and write this as
static void print_ftrace_graph_addr(unsigned long addr,
struct task_struct *tsk,
unsigned long sp, int *graph)
{
unsigned long ret_addr;
int index = tsk->curr_ret_stack;
if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER))
return;
if (addr != ((unsigned long)return_to_handler - 4))
return;
--
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