Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <574cbef1-89ce-3e43-cebb-5db1d8e854e5@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Mar 2022 06:36:09 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.5.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 06/11] arm64: Use stack_trace_consume_fn and rename
 args to unwind()
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, jpoimboe@redhat.com,
        ardb@kernel.org, nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com,
        sjitindarsingh@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
        jmorris@namei.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <95691cae4f4504f33d0fc9075541b1e7deefe96f>
 <20220117145608.6781-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20220117145608.6781-7-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
 <YgutJKqYe8ss8LLd@FVFF77S0Q05N>
 <845e4589-97d9-5371-3a0e-f6e05919f32d@linux.microsoft.com>
 <YiY6hecX0pVWowQ7@sirena.org.uk>
 <c494fa10-e973-c137-b637-66bde327611c@linux.microsoft.com>
 <YiiT2lFuxc3ob+Zq@sirena.org.uk>
 <alpine.LSU.2.21.2203100923470.16704@pobox.suse.cz>
From:   "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2203100923470.16704@pobox.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 3/10/22 02:33, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:00:35PM -0600, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote:
>>
>>> It is just that patch 11 that defines "select
>>> HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE" did not receive any comments from you
>>> (unless I missed a comment that came from you. That is entirely
>>> possible. If I missed it, my bad). Since you suggested that change, I
>>> just wanted to make sure that that patch looks OK to you.
>>
>> I think that's more a question for the livepatch people to be honest -
>> it's not entirely a technical one, there's a bunch of confidence level
>> stuff going on.  For example there was some suggestion that people might
>> insist on having objtool support, though there's also substantial
>> pushback on making objtool a requirement for anything from other
>> quarters.  I was hoping that posting that patch would provoke some
>> discussion about what exactly is needed but that's not happened thus
>> far.
> 
> I think everyone will be happy with HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE on arm64 as 
> long as there is a guarantee that stack traces are really reliable. My 
> understanding is that there is still some work to be done on arm64 arch 
> side (but I may have misunderstood what Mark R. said elsewhere). And yes, 
> then there is a question of objtool. It is one option but not the only 
> one. There have been proposals of implementing guarantees on a compiler 
> side and leaving objtool for x86_64 only (albeit objtool may bring more 
> features to the table... ORC, arch features checking).
> 
> Madhavan also mentioned that he enhanced objtool and he planned to submit 
> it eventually 
> (https://lore.kernel.org/all/1a0e19db-a7f8-4c8e-0163-398fcd364d54@linux.microsoft.com/T/#u), 
> so maybe arm64 maintainers could decide on a future direction based on 
> that?
> 

Yes. I am working on that right now. Hope to send it out soon.

Madhavan