On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 06:03:11PM +0200, Torsten Duwe wrote: > This is more an RFC in the original sense: is this basically > the correct approach? (as I had to tweak the API a bit). > > In particular the code does not detect interrupts and exception > frames, and does not yet check whether the code address is valid. > The latter check would also have to be omitted for the latest frame > on other tasks' stacks. This would require some more tweaking. > > unwind_frame() now reports whether we had to stop normally or due to > an error condition; walk_stackframe() will pass that info. > __save_stack_trace() is used for a start to check the validity of a > frame; maybe save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() will need its own callback. > > Any comments welcome. > > Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe <duwe@xxxxxxx> Before we do this we'll need the same analysis we did for ppc64le to figure out if objtool is needed. -- Josh
