| Message ID | 172895572290.107311.16057631001860177198.stgit@devnote2 (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | tracing: fprobe: function_graph: Multi-function graph and fprobe on fgraph | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-PR | fail | merge-conflict |
FYI, for anything to do with function hooks (fentry), the subject should be "ftrace:" not "tracing:". Tracing has to do with the tracing infrastructure, whereas ftrace is the function hook infrastructure. I just accepted the first two patches of this series and made the changes to the subjects. If a change is for function graph infrastructure specifically, you can use "fgraph:" instead. -- Steve On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 10:28:43 +0900 "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote: > From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> > > Since the arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs) is only valid when the > FL_SAVE_REGS is set, we need to use `&arch_ftrace_regs()->regs` for > ftrace_regs_*() APIs because those APIs are for ftrace_regs, not > complete pt_regs. >
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 17:27:57 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > FYI, for anything to do with function hooks (fentry), the subject should be > "ftrace:" not "tracing:". Ah, yes. > > Tracing has to do with the tracing infrastructure, whereas ftrace is the > function hook infrastructure. > > I just accepted the first two patches of this series and made the changes > to the subjects. OK, thanks! > > If a change is for function graph infrastructure specifically, you can use > "fgraph:" instead. Just to confirm, is "function_graph:" for function graph tracer itself? Thank you, > > -- Steve > > > On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 10:28:43 +0900 > "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote: > > > From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> > > > > Since the arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs) is only valid when the > > FL_SAVE_REGS is set, we need to use `&arch_ftrace_regs()->regs` for > > ftrace_regs_*() APIs because those APIs are for ftrace_regs, not > > complete pt_regs. > >
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 08:25:41 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > If a change is for function graph infrastructure specifically, you can use > > "fgraph:" instead. > > Just to confirm, is "function_graph:" for function graph tracer itself? If it is for the function graph tracer, I would use "function_graph:" if it's for the function graph infrastructure, I would use "fgraph:" Thanks, -- Steve
diff --git a/include/linux/ftrace_regs.h b/include/linux/ftrace_regs.h index dea6a0851b74..b78a0a60515b 100644 --- a/include/linux/ftrace_regs.h +++ b/include/linux/ftrace_regs.h @@ -17,17 +17,17 @@ struct __arch_ftrace_regs { struct ftrace_regs; #define ftrace_regs_get_instruction_pointer(fregs) \ - instruction_pointer(arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs)) + instruction_pointer(&arch_ftrace_regs(fregs)->regs) #define ftrace_regs_get_argument(fregs, n) \ - regs_get_kernel_argument(arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs), n) + regs_get_kernel_argument(&arch_ftrace_regs(fregs)->regs, n) #define ftrace_regs_get_stack_pointer(fregs) \ - kernel_stack_pointer(arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs)) + kernel_stack_pointer(&arch_ftrace_regs(fregs)->regs) #define ftrace_regs_return_value(fregs) \ - regs_return_value(arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs)) + regs_return_value(&arch_ftrace_regs(fregs)->regs) #define ftrace_regs_set_return_value(fregs, ret) \ - regs_set_return_value(arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs), ret) + regs_set_return_value(&arch_ftrace_regs(fregs)->regs, ret) #define ftrace_override_function_with_return(fregs) \ - override_function_with_return(arch_ftrace_get_regs(fregs)) + override_function_with_return(&arch_ftrace_regs(fregs)->regs) #define ftrace_regs_query_register_offset(name) \ regs_query_register_offset(name)