On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 10:58 PM Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Introduce helper bpf_get_task_stack(), which dumps stack trace of given > task. This is different to bpf_get_stack(), which gets stack track of > current task. One potential use case of bpf_get_task_stack() is to call > it from bpf_iter__task and dump all /proc/<pid>/stack to a seq_file. > > bpf_get_task_stack() uses stack_trace_save_tsk() instead of > get_perf_callchain() for kernel stack. The benefit of this choice is that > stack_trace_save_tsk() doesn't require changes in arch/. The downside of > using stack_trace_save_tsk() is that stack_trace_save_tsk() dumps the > stack trace to unsigned long array. For 32-bit systems, we need to > translate it to u64 array. > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> It doesn't apply: Applying: bpf: Introduce helper bpf_get_task_stack() Using index info to reconstruct a base tree... error: patch failed: kernel/bpf/stackmap.c:471 error: kernel/bpf/stackmap.c: patch does not apply error: Did you hand edit your patch? It does not apply to blobs recorded in its index. Patch failed at 0002 bpf: Introduce helper bpf_get_task_stack()
