linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arch: remove deprecated function name

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z6bbY1wsLlGvJ7Lw@archie.me>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2025 11:19:47 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Jiayuan Chen <mrpre@....com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	rdunlap@...radead.org, corbet@....net
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arch: remove deprecated function name

On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 08:55:04PM +0800, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
> The dumpstack.c file has undergone many modifications, and the
> print_context_stack() function was removed or rewritten a long time ago,
> so it's better to remove the incorrect guidance.

"print_context_stack() was removed in 2016 by commit c8fe4609827ae
("x86/dumpstack: Remove dump_trace() and related callbacks"). Remove
the now-inaccurate guide."

> 
> I also want to preserve the original contributor info by keeping email
> address and name.
> 

"While at it, also link to Ingo's explanatory message."

>  The question about the '?' preceding function names in an x86 stacktrace

> -keeps popping up, here's an indepth explanation. It helps if the reader
> -stares at print_context_stack() and the whole machinery in and around
> -arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c.
> +keeps popping up. This provides guidance about it. It helps if the reader
> +stares at printk_stack_addressk() and its callers and pays special
"... Here's the explanation, that helps when the reader ..."
> +attention to the 'reliable' parameter ('?' basically means that the
> +address is unreliable).
>  
> -Adapted from Ingo's mail, Message-ID: <20150521101614.GA10889@...il.com>:
> +The detail about '?' can be found in the comments within dumpstack.c:
> +::
"The answer can be found in the comments within show_trace_log_lvl() body
in arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c::"
><snipped>...
> -If the address does not fit into our expected frame pointer chain we
> -still print it, but we print a '?'. It can mean two things:
> +You can also get more info from Ingo's original emal. [1]_
"For more information, see also Ingo's email. [1]_"
><snipped>...
> +.. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20150521101614.GA10889@gmail.com/

Thanks.

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)