From: "Steven J. Magnani" <steve@digidescorp.com>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Cc: microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] microblaze: Support FRAME_POINTER for better backtrace
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:51:16 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1268261476.3076.100.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1267478765.17327.3.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com>
I've had some time to bake a Microblaze implementation of this and have
come up with a question...
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 15:26 -0600, Steven J. Magnani wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:43 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > This doesn't look that bad compared to what some of the other
> > architectures have to deal with. If the frame pointer is always setup
> > using these addik/swi pairs then you can trivially scan an arbitrary
> > number of instructions attempting to match before giving up. We do
> > similar things for sh64 where we also have to figure out how stack frames
> > were created in order to roll them back.
> >
> > In any event, take a look at arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh5/unwind.c, you should
> > be able to use a similar scheme without the need for undue complexity.
> >
>
> Thanks for the tip. This looks manageable. I had thought to search for
> instructions that create frames but didn't think working backwards from
> return addresses was a good idea. Using kallsyms to get the "top" of
> each function is a nice way around that.
The kallsyms approach to unwinding depends on as many functions as
possible being in the table, for two reasons:
* The unwind can't get past an address that kallsyms can't identify
* A mis-lookup, such as reporting a nearby global function when the
actual address lies in a static function, can send the unwind off the
rails
To get static (local) functions into kallsyms, I've found that I need to
specify -fno-unit-at-a-time to Microblaze gcc 4.1.2. I suspect that
particular option has other side-effects, but despite much searching I
couldn't find any mention of a gcc option that would do what I need. My
x86_64 gcc (4.4.1) seems to emit local symbols by default even with
-funit-at-a-time.
Any suggestions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven J. Magnani "I claim this network for MARS!
www.digidescorp.com Earthling, return my space modulator!"
#include <standard.disclaimer>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-10 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-25 20:13 Steven J. Magnani
2010-02-26 8:06 ` Michal Simek
2010-02-26 16:49 ` Steven J. Magnani
2010-03-01 1:43 ` Paul Mundt
2010-03-01 21:26 ` Steven J. Magnani
2010-03-10 22:51 ` Steven J. Magnani [this message]
2010-03-11 0:05 ` Paul Mundt
2010-03-01 23:04 ` Paul Mundt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1268261476.3076.100.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com \
--to=steve@digidescorp.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome