Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 4 May 2021 16:52:48 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     madvenka@linux.microsoft.com
Cc:     broonie@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, jthierry@redhat.com,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
        pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/4] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability
 checks in the unwinder
Message-ID: <20210504215248.oi3zay3memgqri33@treble>
References: <65cf4dfbc439b010b50a0c46ec500432acde86d6>
 <20210503173615.21576-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20210503173615.21576-2-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210503173615.21576-2-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 12:36:12PM -0500, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com wrote:
> @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame)
>  	unsigned long fp = frame->fp;
>  	struct stack_info info;
>  
> +	frame->reliable = true;
> +

Why set 'reliable' to true on every invocation of unwind_frame()?
Shouldn't it be remembered across frames?

Also, it looks like there are several error scenarios where it returns
-EINVAL but doesn't set 'reliable' to false.

-- 
Josh