Messages in this thread | | | From | Nick Desaulniers <> | Date | Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:53:55 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 7/8] dynamic_debug: add asm-generic implementation for DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS |
| |
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 1:46 PM Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote: > > On 18/06/2019 00.35, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 3:20 PM Rasmus Villemoes > > <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote: > >> > >> It relies on > >> > >> (1) standard assembly directives that should work on > >> all architectures > >> (2) the "i" constraint for an constant, and > >> (3) %cN emitting the constant operand N without punctuation > >> > >> and of course the layout of _ddebug being what one expects. > >> > >> Now, clang before 9.0 doesn't satisfy (3) for non-x86 targets. > > > > Thanks so much for resending with this case fixed, and sorry I did not > > implement (3) sooner! I appreciate your patience. > > Acked-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> > > > > I'm happy to help test this series, do you have a tree I could pull > > these from quickly? > > I've pushed them to https://github.com/Villemoes/linux/tree/dyndebug_v6 > . They rebase pretty cleanly to just about anything you might prefer > testing on. Enabling it for arm64 or ppc64 is a trivial two-liner > similar to the x86 patch (and similar to the previous patches for those > arches). Thanks for volunteering to test this :)
Compile tested x86_64 allyesconfig boot tested x86_64 defconfig+CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG
(just curious why the Kconfig changes for arm64 or ppc64 aren't included in this set?)
> > > Anything I should test at runtime besides a boot > > test? > > Well, apart from booting, I've mostly just tested that the debugfs > control file is identical before and after enabling relative pointers,
mainline x86_64 defconfig+CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG $ cat /dfs/dynamic_debug/control | wc -l 2488
mainline x86_64 defconfig+CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG+this patch series $ cat /dfs/dynamic_debug/control | wc -l 2486
(seems like maybe 2 are missing? Let me try to collect a diff. Maybe 2 were removed in this series?)
> and that enabling/disabling various pr_debug()s by writing to the > control file takes effect. I should only be changing the format for
Can you suggest one that's easy to test?
> storing the metadata in the kernel image, so I think that should be enough. > > While this is still not merged, some new user of one of the string > members could creep in, but that should be caught at build time.
-- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
| |