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:   Thu, 14 Oct 2021 19:07:38 +0100
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, keescook@chromium.org,
        jannh@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        vcaputo@pengaru.com, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
        bristot@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, amistry@google.com,
        Kenta.Tada@sony.com, legion@kernel.org,
        michael.weiss@aisec.fraunhofer.de, mhocko@suse.com, deller@gmx.de,
        zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com, me@tobin.cc, tycho@tycho.pizza,
        tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
        metze@samba.org, laijs@linux.alibaba.com, luto@kernel.org,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, ebiederm@xmission.com,
        ohoono.kwon@samsung.com, kaleshsingh@google.com,
        yifeifz2@illinois.edu, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, vgupta@kernel.org,
        linux@armlinux.org.uk, will@kernel.org, guoren@kernel.org,
        bcain@codeaurora.org, monstr@monstr.eu, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de,
        nickhu@andestech.com, jonas@southpole.se, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
        paul.walmsley@sifive.com, hca@linux.ibm.com,
        ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, davem@davemloft.net, chris@zankel.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] arch: __get_wchan || STACKTRACE_SUPPORT
Message-ID: <20211014180738.GC39276@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <20211008111527.438276127@infradead.org>
 <20211008111626.392918519@infradead.org>
 <20211008124052.GA976@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>
 <YWBLl0mMTGPE/7hM@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20211008161707.i3cwz6qukgcf4frj@treble>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20211008161707.i3cwz6qukgcf4frj@treble>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1+11 (2f07cb52) (2018-12-01)
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 09:17:07AM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 03:45:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > stack_trace_save_tsk() *shouldn't* skip anything unless we've explicitly
> > > told it to via skipnr, because I'd expect that
> > 
> > It's what most archs happen to do today and is what
> > stack_trace_save_tsk() as implemented using arch_stack_walk() does.
> > Which is I think the closest to canonical we have.

Ah; and arch_stack_walk() itself shouldn't skip anything, which gives
the consistent low-level semantic I wanted.

> It *is* confusing though.  Even if 'nosched' may be the normally
> desired behavior, stack_trace_save_tsk() should probably be named
> stack_trace_save_tsk_nosched().

I agree that'd be less confusing!

Josh, am I right in my understanding that the reliable stacktrace
functions *shouldn't* skip sched functions, or should those similarly
gain a _nosched suffix?

Thanks,
Mark.