On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:28:10PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> No architecture terminates the stack trace with ULONG_MAX anymore. As the
> code checks the number of entries stored anyway there is no point in
> keeping all that ULONG_MAX magic around.
>
> The histogram code zeroes the storage before saving the stack, so if the
> trace is shorter than the maximum number of entries it can terminate the
> print loop if a zero entry is detected.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org>
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c | 2 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 20 +++++---------------
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c
> @@ -5246,7 +5246,7 @@ static void hist_trigger_stacktrace_prin
> unsigned int i;
>
> for (i = 0; i < max_entries; i++) {
> - if (stacktrace_entries[i] == ULONG_MAX)
> + if (!stacktrace_entries[i])
> return;
>
> seq_printf(m, "%*c", 1 + spaces, ' ');
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
> @@ -18,8 +18,7 @@
>
> #include "trace.h"
>
> -static unsigned long stack_dump_trace[STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES+1] =
> - { [0 ... (STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES)] = ULONG_MAX };
> +static unsigned long stack_dump_trace[STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES + 1];
Is the "+ 1" still needed? AFAICT, accesses to this array never go past
nr_entries.
Also I've been staring at the code but I can't figure out why
max_entries is "- 1".
struct stack_trace stack_trace_max = {
.max_entries = STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES - 1,
.entries = &stack_dump_trace[0],
};
--
Josh
