From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kconfig: hide unwinder menu for KMEMCHECK
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 18:42:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170911234230.wmsd7nkpeckot45m@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170911195950.3077184-1-arnd@arndb.de>
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 09:59:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> When KMEMCHECK is enabled, we always build with frame pointers,
> which is incompatible with ORC_UNWINDER and GUESS_UNWINDER, as
> Kconfig points out:
>
> warning: (FAULT_INJECTION_STACKTRACE_FILTER && LATENCYTOP && KMEMCHECK && LOCKDEP && FRAME_POINTER_UNWINDER) selects FRAME_POINTER which has unmet direct dependencies (DEBUG_KERNEL && (CRIS || M68K || FRV || UML || SUPERH || BLACKFIN || MN10300 || METAG) || ARCH_WANT_FRAME_POINTERS || !ORC_UNWINDER && !GUESS_UNWINDER)
>
> This works around it by making those two unwinders depend on
> !KMEMCHECK. The other three options that enable frame pointers
> (FAULT_INJECTION_STACKTRACE_FILTER, LATENCYTOP and LOCKDEP) only
> do that on some architectures but not on x86.
>
> It's possible that KMEMCHECK doesn't actually require frame pointers
> but only requires some unwinder. If that is the case, we should drop
> the 'select FRAME_POINTER' there. KMEMCHECK is currenly used only
> on x86.
KMEMCHECK should work with *any* of the unwinders because it uses the
unwinder-agnostic save_stack_trace() interface. So removing the 'select
FRAME_POINTER' sounds like the right fix.
--
Josh
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-11 23:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-11 19:59 Arnd Bergmann
2017-09-11 23:42 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
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=20170911234230.wmsd7nkpeckot45m@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®