[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200401174544.GY20730@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 19:45:44 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Julien Thierry <jthierry@...hat.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
mbenes@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] objtool,ftrace: Implement UNWIND_HINT_RET_OFFSET
On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 01:33:03PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 19:09:10 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > > > + if (state->cfa.offset != initial_func_cfi.cfa.offset &&
> > > > + !(ret_offset && state->cfa.offset == initial_func_cfi.cfa.offset + ret_offset))
> > >
> > > Isn't that the same thing as "state->cfa.offset !=
> > > initial_func_cfi.cfa.offset + ret_offset" ?
> >
> > I'm confused on what cfa.offset is, sometimes it increase with
> > stack_size, sometimes it doesn't.
>
> I believe what Julien is saying is the above logic is equivalent:
>
> if (x != y &&
> !(z && x == y + z))
>
> is the same as:
>
> if (x != y + z)
It is not, the former will accept either x==y || x==y+z, while the
latter will only accept x==y+z.
For stack_size, I'm confident in just x==y+z, for offset I saw
conflicting things.
Since the annotation is now used in only a single place, maybe x==y+z
will just work, I'll go try once I've managed to unconfuse myself on the
whole fp-unwind situation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists