[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:11:53 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@...driver.com>,
catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com, mingo@...hat.com,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] tracing/arm64: Have max stack tracer handle the
case of return address after data
On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 12:36:32PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:28:26 +0100
> Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > > + * Note, this may change in the future, and we will need to deal with that
> > > + * if it were to happen.
> > > + */
> > > +#define ARCH_RET_ADDR_AFTER_LOCAL_VARS 1
> >
> > I know it's long already, but prefixing this with FTRACE_ would be good so
> > that other code doesn't use it for anything. It's not the end of the world
> > if the ftrace stack usage statistics are wonky, but if people tried to use
> > this for crazy things like livepatching then we'd be in trouble.
> >
> > Maybe FTRACE_ARCH_FRAME_AFTER_LOCALS, which is the same length as what
> > you currently have?
>
> Note, it would still need to be prefixed with "ARCH_" as that's the way
> of showing arch specific defines.
>
> We could make it more descriptive of what it will do and not the reason
> for why it is done...
>
>
> ARCH_FTRACE_SHIFT_STACK_TRACER
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Thanks, Steve.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists