On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 11:48:36PM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote: > > > On 6/26/22 04:18, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 12:19:01AM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 6/23/22 12:32, Will Deacon wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 04:07:11PM -0500, madvenka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>>> From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>> I have synced this patch series to v5.19-rc2. > >>>> I have also removed the following patch. > >>>> > >>>> [PATCH v14 7/7] arm64: Select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE > >>>> > >>>> as HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE depends on STACK_VALIDATION which is not present > >>>> yet. This patch will be added in the future once Objtool is enhanced to > >>>> provide stack validation in some form. > >>> > >>> Given that it's not at all obvious that we're going to end up using objtool > >>> for arm64, does this patch series gain us anything in isolation? > >>> > >> > >> BTW, I have synced my patchset to 5.19-rc2 and sent it as v15. > >> > >> So, to answer your question, patches 1 thru 3 in v15 are still useful even if we don't > >> consider reliable stacktrace. These patches reorganize the unwinder code based on > >> comments from both Mark Rutland and Mark Brown. Mark Brown has already OKed them. > >> If Mark Rutland OKes them, we should upstream them. > > > > Sorry for the delay; I have been rather swamped recently and haven't had the > > time to give this the time it needs. > > > > I'm happy with patches 1 and 2, and I've acked those in case Will wants to pick > > them. > > > > Thanks for the review. > > Will, > > Are you fine with picking up patches 1 and 2? > > For the other patches, I have responded separately. Sure thing, I'll do that today. Thanks for persevering with this. Will
