Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Mar 2022 13:46:29 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] stacktrace: add interface based on shadow call stack |
| |
On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 16:32:52 +0100 andrey.konovalov@linux.dev wrote:
> From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > Add a new interface stack_trace_save_shadow() for collecting stack traces > by copying frames from the Shadow Call Stack. > > Collecting stack traces this way is significantly faster: boot time > of a defconfig build with KASAN enabled gets descreased by ~30%. > > The few patches following this one add an implementation of > stack_trace_save_shadow() for arm64. > > The implementation of the added interface is not meant to use > stack_trace_consume_fn to avoid making a function call for each > collected frame to further improve performance. > > ... > > @@ -108,4 +111,16 @@ static inline int stack_trace_save_tsk_reliable(struct task_struct *tsk, > } > #endif > > +#if defined(CONFIG_STACKTRACE) && defined(CONFIG_HAVE_SHADOW_STACKTRACE) > +int stack_trace_save_shadow(unsigned long *store, unsigned int size, > + unsigned int skipnr); > +#else > +static inline int stack_trace_save_shadow(unsigned long *store, > + unsigned int size, > + unsigned int skipnr) > +{ > + return -ENOSYS; > +} > +#endif
checkpatch sayeth "WARNING: ENOSYS means 'invalid syscall nr' and nothing else".
checkpatch also picked up a typo in a changelog. Useful thing to run, is checkpatch.
| |