[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160803141352.tp6z4j4h25pd4lsd@treble>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:13:52 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/19] x86/dumpstack: fix function graph tracing stack
dump reliability issues
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:45:30PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:31:25 -0500
> Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, we do need to add a parameter to ftrace_push_return_trace(). But
> > callers which don't implement it could just pass zero like they do with
> > 'fp'.
> >
>
> Right, if zero is passed in, then just ignore it.
I still think we need the define though, because there will be two
versions of ftrace_graph_ret_addr().
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists