Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755285AbbGTQUI (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2015 12:20:08 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:56612 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751052AbbGTQUG (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2015 12:20:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:20:04 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Jungseok Lee Cc: Steven Rostedt , Mark Rutland , Catalin Marinas , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , AKASHI Takahiro , "broonie@kernel.org" , "david.griego@linaro.org" , "olof@lixom.net" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] arm64: refactor save_stack_trace() Message-ID: <20150720162004.GL9908@arm.com> References: <20150716102405.2cc8c406@gandalf.local.home> <12F47692-3010-4886-B87D-3D7820609177@gmail.com> <20150716113115.45a17f17@gandalf.local.home> <20150716121658.7982fdf5@gandalf.local.home> <20150717124054.GE26091@leverpostej> <20150717090009.720f6bd0@gandalf.local.home> <77EA0F10-D5F6-48BD-8652-3B979A978659@gmail.com> <20150717104144.6588b2f7@gandalf.local.home> <0886A996-40E1-49E9-823C-85E55A858716@gmail.com> <1357EA74-B972-4B99-ADB0-BC7E8F06DDB5@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1357EA74-B972-4B99-ADB0-BC7E8F06DDB5@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2654 Lines: 77 Hi all, On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 04:34:21PM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote: > On Jul 17, 2015, at 11:59 PM, Jungseok Lee wrote: > > On Jul 17, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> Thanks! Can you repost patch 1 with the changes I recommended, so that > >> I can get an Acked-by from the arm64 maintainers and pull all the > >> changes in together. This is fine for a 4.3 release, right? That is, it > >> doesn't need to go into 4.2-rcs. > >> > > > > It's not hard to repost a patch, but I feel like we have to wait for Akashi's response. > > Also, it might be needed to consider Mark's comment on arch part. > > > > If they are okay, I will proceed. > > The [RFC 1/3] patch used in my environment is shaped as follows. > I leave the hunk for *only* clear synchronization. This is why I choose this format > instead of reposting a patch. I hope it would help to track down this thread. > > I think this is my best at this point. > > ----8<---- > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h > index c5534fa..2b43e20 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h > @@ -13,8 +13,9 @@ > > #include > > -#define MCOUNT_ADDR ((unsigned long)_mcount) > -#define MCOUNT_INSN_SIZE AARCH64_INSN_SIZE > +#define MCOUNT_ADDR ((unsigned long)_mcount) > +#define MCOUNT_INSN_SIZE AARCH64_INSN_SIZE > +#define FTRACE_STACK_FRAME_OFFSET AARCH64_INSN_SIZE > > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > #include > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > index 407991b..9ab67af 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > #include > #include > > +#include > #include > > /* > @@ -52,7 +53,7 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct stackframe *frame) > * -4 here because we care about the PC at time of bl, > * not where the return will go. > */ > - frame->pc = *(unsigned long *)(fp + 8) - 4; > + frame->pc = *(unsigned long *)(fp + 8) - AARCH64_INSN_SIZE; > > return 0; > } The arm64 bits look fine to me: Acked-by: Will Deacon Steve: feel free to take this along with the other ftrace changes. I don't anticipate any conflicts, but if anything crops up in -next we can sort it out then. Thanks! Will -- 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/