[RFC PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: Implement stack trace reliability checks

[Mark Brown]

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 05:32:27PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

> Hm, for that matter, even without renaming things, a comment above
> stack_trace_save_tsk_reliable() describing the meaning of "reliable"
> would be a good idea.

Might be better to place something at the prototype for
arch_stack_walk_reliable() or cross link the two since that's where any
new architectures should be starting, or perhaps even better to extend
the document that Mark wrote further and point to that from both places.  

Some more explict pointer to live patching as the only user would
definitely be good but I think the more important thing would be writing
down any assumptions in the API that aren't already written down and
we're supposed to be relying on.  Mark's document captured a lot of it
but it sounds like there's more here, and even with knowing that this
interface is only used by live patch and digging into what it does it's
not always clear what happens to work with the code right now and what's
something that's suitable to be relied on.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20210412/ffcf323a/attachment-0001.sig>