Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:10:51 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces | From | Guenter Roeck <> |
| |
On 3/27/24 07:44, Simon Horman wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:52:46AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> Add name of functions triggering warning backtraces to the __bug_table >> object section to enable support for suppressing WARNING backtraces. >> >> To limit image size impact, the pointer to the function name is only added >> to the __bug_table section if both CONFIG_KUNIT_SUPPRESS_BACKTRACE and >> CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE are enabled. Otherwise, the __func__ assembly >> parameter is replaced with a (dummy) NULL parameter to avoid an image size >> increase due to unused __func__ entries (this is necessary because __func__ >> is not a define but a virtual variable). >> >> Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org> >> Acked-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> >> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> >> --- >> - Rebased to v6.9-rc1 >> - Added Tested-by:, Acked-by:, and Reviewed-by: tags >> - Introduced KUNIT_SUPPRESS_BACKTRACE configuration option >> >> arch/sh/include/asm/bug.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/bug.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/bug.h >> index 05a485c4fabc..470ce6567d20 100644 >> --- a/arch/sh/include/asm/bug.h >> +++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/bug.h >> @@ -24,21 +24,36 @@ >> * The offending file and line are encoded in the __bug_table section. >> */ >> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE >> + >> +#ifdef CONFIG_KUNIT_SUPPRESS_BACKTRACE >> +# define HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION >> +# define __BUG_FUNC_PTR "\t.long %O2\n" >> +#else >> +# define __BUG_FUNC_PTR >> +#endif /* CONFIG_KUNIT_SUPPRESS_BACKTRACE */ >> + > > Hi Guenter, > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning. > > .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc, > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced? >
Thanks a lot for the feedback.
The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE, so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do about it.
I'll wait for comments from others before making any changes.
Thanks, Guenter
>> #define _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY \ >> "\t.pushsection __bug_table,\"aw\"\n" \ >> "2:\t.long 1b, %O1\n" \ >> - "\t.short %O2, %O3\n" \ >> - "\t.org 2b+%O4\n" \ >> + __BUG_FUNC_PTR \ >> + "\t.short %O3, %O4\n" \ >> + "\t.org 2b+%O5\n" \ >> "\t.popsection\n" >> #else >> #define _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY \ >> "\t.pushsection __bug_table,\"aw\"\n" \ >> "2:\t.long 1b\n" \ >> - "\t.short %O3\n" \ >> - "\t.org 2b+%O4\n" \ >> + "\t.short %O4\n" \ >> + "\t.org 2b+%O5\n" \ >> "\t.popsection\n" >> #endif >> >> +#ifdef HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION >> +# define __BUG_FUNC __func__ >> +#else >> +# define __BUG_FUNC NULL >> +#endif >> + >> #define BUG() \ >> do { \ >> __asm__ __volatile__ ( \ > > ...
| |