Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 10:43:03 +0800 Jiping Ma wrote: > > *Why* does the frame appear to be off-by-one? > Because the PC is LR in ARM64 stack actually.  Following is ARM64 stack > layout. Please refer to the figure 3 in > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0055b/IHI0055B_aapcs64

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

On 2019年08月01日 17:41, Will Deacon wrote: On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 04:33:40PM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: In arm64, the PC of the frame is matched to the last frame function, rather than the function of his frame. For the following example, the stack size of occupy_stack_init function should be 337

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 16:33:40 +0800 Jiping Ma wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c > index 5d16f73898db..ed80b95abf06 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c > @@ -40,16 +40,28 @@ static void print_max_stack(void) > >

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 04:33:40PM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: > In arm64, the PC of the frame is matched to the last frame function, > rather than the function of his frame. For the following example, the > stack size of occupy_stack_init function should be 3376, rather than 176. > > Wrong info: >