Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 9 Mar 2018 16:54:12 +0100 | From | Torsten Duwe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc64le save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable (Was: HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE) |
| |
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 08:43:33 +1100 Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:09:24 +0100 > Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de> wrote:
> > +save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(struct task_struct *tsk, > > + struct stack_trace *trace) > > Just double checking this is called under the task_rq_lock, so its > safe to call task_stack_page() as opposed to try_get_task_stack()
Yes. IIRC a comment at the call site mentioned it.
[...] > > + if (sp < stack_page + sizeof(struct thread_struct) > > + || sp > stack_page + THREAD_SIZE - > > STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD) > > + return 1; > > Some of this is already present in validate_sp(), it also validates > irq stacks, should we just reuse that?
This goes a bit along one of Josh's points; I'll answer there, OK?
[...]
> Looks good to me otherwise. > > Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> Thanks.
Torsten
| |