Heiko Carstens writes:
> So, the in both variants s390 provides nearly identical data. The only
> difference is that for FL_SAVE_REGS the program status word mask is
> missing; therefore it is not possible to figure out the condition code
> or if interrupts were enabled/disabled.
>
> Vasily, Sven
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 09:55:52PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> > > > > > > I think this is wrong. We need to differentiate
> > > > > > > between ftrace_caller() and ftrace_regs_caller()
> > > > > > > here, and only return pt_regs if coming in through
> > > > > > > ftrace_regs_caller() (i.e., FL_S
Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:06:48 +0530
"Naveen N. Rao" wrote:
As I understand it, the reason ftrace_get_regs() was introduced was to
be able to only return the pt_regs, if _all_ registers were saved into
it, which we don't do when coming in through ftrace_caller(). See the
Christophe Leroy wrote:
+ S390 people
Le 15/02/2022 à 15:28, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
Le 15/02/2022 à 14:36, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
Michael Ellerman wrote:
Christophe Leroy writes:
Le 14/02/2022 à 16:25, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
Christophe Leroy wrote:
Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_
+ S390 people
Le 15/02/2022 à 15:28, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
Le 15/02/2022 à 14:36, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
Michael Ellerman wrote:
Christophe Leroy writes:
Le 14/02/2022 à 16:25, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
Christophe Leroy wrote:
Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:06:48 +0530
"Naveen N. Rao" wrote:
> As I understand it, the reason ftrace_get_regs() was introduced was to
> be able to only return the pt_regs, if _all_ registers were saved into
> it, which we don't do when coming in through ftrace_caller(). See the
> x86 implementati
Le 15/02/2022 à 14:36, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
> Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Christophe Leroy writes:
>>> Le 14/02/2022 à 16:25, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
> of livepatching.
>
> Also no
Michael Ellerman wrote:
Christophe Leroy writes:
Le 14/02/2022 à 16:25, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
Christophe Leroy wrote:
Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
of livepatching.
Also note that powerpc being the last one to convert to
CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS,
Christophe Leroy writes:
> Le 14/02/2022 à 16:25, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
>> Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>> Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
>>> of livepatching.
>>>
>>> Also note that powerpc being the last one to convert to
>>> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, it w
Le 14/02/2022 à 16:25, Naveen N. Rao a écrit :
> Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
>> of livepatching.
>>
>> Also note that powerpc being the last one to convert to
>> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, it will now be possible to remove
>>
Christophe Leroy wrote:
Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
of livepatching.
Also note that powerpc being the last one to convert to
CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, it will now be possible to remove
klp_arch_set_pc() on all architectures.
Signed-off-by: Christoph
On Mon, 20 Dec 2021, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
> of livepatching.
>
> Also note that powerpc being the last one to convert to
> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, it will now be possible to remove
> klp_arch_set_pc() on all architec
Implement CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. It accelerates the call
of livepatching.
Also note that powerpc being the last one to convert to
CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, it will now be possible to remove
klp_arch_set_pc() on all architectures.
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy
---
arch/powerpc
13 matches
Mail list logo
