From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965027AbbJVOFv (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:05:51 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.220.46]:32933 "EHLO mail-pa0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932560AbbJVOFt convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:05:49 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] arm64: ftrace: fix incorrect output from stack tracer Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jungseok Lee In-Reply-To: <36B8D79C-E3BD-4937-94D1-B9725CA4FD68@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 23:05:43 +0900 Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, olof@lixom.net, broonie@kernel.org, david.griego@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <6852455A-9805-4824-8C19-0EEC8E705B3E@gmail.com> References: <1444298504-10392-1-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <36B8D79C-E3BD-4937-94D1-B9725CA4FD68@gmail.com> To: AKASHI Takahiro X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Oct 8, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Jungseok Lee wrote: > On Oct 8, 2015, at 7:01 PM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > Hi Akashi, > >> This is the third patch series for fixing stack tracer on arm64. >> The original issue was reported by Jungseok[1], and then I found more >> issues[2]. >> (Steven, Jungseok, sorry for not replying to your comments directly.) >> >> I address here all the issues and implement fixes described in [2] except >> for interrupt-triggered problems, ie. II-3). Recent discussions[3] about >> introducing a dedicated interrupt stack suggests that we may avoid walking >> through from an interrupt stack to a process stack. >> (So interrupt-stack patch is a prerequisite.) >> >> Basically, >> patch1 corresponds to the original issue. >> patch2 is a proactive improvement of function_graph tracer. >> patch3 corresponds to II-4(functions under function_graph tracer). >> patch4 corresponds to II-5(leaf function). >> patch5, 6 and 7 correspond to II-1(slurping stack) and II-2(differences >> between x86 and arm64). >> >> Each fix can be applied independently, but if patch5, 6 and 7 are >> acceptable, patch1 is not necessary because patch7 replaces a default >> stack tracer. I've used this series *without Patch1* for over a week. It works well till now. I have not observed any issues, such as function graph thing, of which I'm aware. Please note that I have not reviewed internals of the analyzer and related logics carefully. Best Regards Jungseok Lee >> I tested the code with v4.3-rc3 + Jungseok's patch v3[4]. >> >> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-July/354126.html >> [2] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-July/355920.html >> [3] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-September/368003.html >> [4] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-September/371451.html > > The [4] is not a valid patch. I hope the test has been going with the following one. > > http://www.kernelhub.org/?msg=841034&p=2 > > I will leave comments after playing with this series on top of my IRQ stack tree. > > Best Regards > Jungseok Lee