Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757405AbaFYOyU (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:54:20 -0400
Received: from mail-ve0-f172.google.com ([209.85.128.172]:62841 "EHLO
	mail-ve0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756918AbaFYOyP (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:54:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20140625090110.GD6153@arm.com>
References: <CAFrcx1n-cPXm=w+84gQiUjZoFKi7gYnvJ0BQ+8yXKS=k3nEt3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<1403025065-18001-1-git-send-email-jean.pihet@linaro.org>
	<20140618125355.GA2186@arm.com>
	<CAFrcx1mA7kXiG9wMQqn=zYPYqrpGxDYWfoMP97RvkkrMTvNoRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140625090110.GD6153@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 16:54:14 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFrcx1=gwRzU9heY8o9sphWUiga63NGdpN+cUh81Njr-X-OEGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: perf: allow tracing with kernel tracepoints events
From: Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@linaro.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
        Sneha Priya <sneha.cse@hotmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Will,

On 25 June 2014 11:01, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 09:10:35AM +0100, Jean Pihet wrote:
>> Hi Will,
>
> Hi Jean,
>
>> On 18 June 2014 14:53, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 06:11:05PM +0100, Jean Pihet wrote:
>> >> Tested with perf record and tracepoints filtering (-e <tracepoint>), with
>> >> unwinding using fp (--call-graph fp) and dwarf info (--call-graph dwarf).
>> >
>> > Whilst the old ACPS unwinding only needs PC, FP and SP, is this definitely
>> > true for exidx and DWARF-based unwinding? Given that libunwind ends up
>> > running a state machine for the latter, can we guarantee that we won't hit
>> > instructions that require access to other general purpose registers?
>> Yes. dwarf unwinding does not need anything extra. Once seeded all the
>> rest is extracted from the dwarf trace info.
>
> Ok, but what if the LR isn't saved on the stack, for example? What if the
> code you're trying to unwind is hand-written assembly annotated with CFI
> directives?
Then in that case the unwinding is not possible unless the
hand-crafted asm is compatible with the requested unwinding method
(fp, dwarf etc.). Do you expect problems there, if so can you give
more details?

>
> Will

Jean
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/