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:   Fri, 21 May 2021 18:53:18 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To:     "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc:     mark.rutland@arm.com, jpoimboe@redhat.com, ardb@kernel.org,
        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 v4 1/2] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability
 checks in the unwinder
Message-ID: <20210521175318.GF5825@sirena.org.uk>
References: <68eeda61b3e9579d65698a884b26c8632025e503>
 <20210516040018.128105-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20210516040018.128105-2-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20210521161117.GB5825@sirena.org.uk>
 <a2a32666-c27e-3a0f-06b2-b7a2baa7e0f1@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20210521174242.GD5825@sirena.org.uk>
 <26c33633-029e-6374-16e6-e9418099da95@linux.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1Ow488MNN9B9o/ov"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <26c33633-029e-6374-16e6-e9418099da95@linux.microsoft.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk


--1Ow488MNN9B9o/ov
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:47:13PM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote:
> On 5/21/21 12:42 PM, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Like I say we may come up with some use for the flag in error cases in
> > future so I'm not opposed to keeping the accounting there.

> So, should I leave it the way it is now? Or should I not set reliable = false
> for errors? Which one do you prefer?

> Josh,

> Are you OK with not flagging reliable = false for errors in unwind_frame()?

I think it's fine to leave it as it is.

--1Ow488MNN9B9o/ov
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmCn840ACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9B64Af+PKOojLf3mxi8xJnWbYRZtZbrmPoHiSiT/enzT0Y/XjSubDQOp0pxbeJT
ah0rvSPhTYWO7uUm2SmBcaWUN0eidHRotNWCvPadRISC6JwLGcS3qmAnTdZ8JNXE
4NT3oyLC8yAFI6vv5NXf9SwFW+puPPWS7quktVWiJ5Xb12vd+5x+n5lPcrMinImi
5sWIcINkCXrthJTudokrCtuaNLp0aDQVTwQTmLBQ7q2fjAxfiylvxi6J556/YUFQ
UvtgW9zT7JjhFuEoeiO3/QekwUijHzelN0inaw0kX8rtaD3FrPqSI8JYaBXDEC4u
/zkIcbJJEvSDyZG8v/yUD+CeN+9CwA==
=yZ+q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--1Ow488MNN9B9o/ov--