[RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace

Mark Brown broonie at kernel.org
Mon Feb 1 11:22:18 EST 2021

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 04:02:25PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:21:43AM -0600, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote:

> > OK. Before this whole discussion, I did not know that the compiler cannot be trusted.

> I think "the compiler cannot be trusted" is overly strong. We want to
> *verify* that the compiler is doing what we expect, which might be more
> than what it guarantees to do (and those expectations can change over
> time), but it doesn't mean we should try to avoid the compiler wherever
> possible.

Right, part of what objtool offers here is that it is a static checker
which has an independent implementation of the assumptions we have about
the generated code to that in the compiler - the fact that we've got two
implementations means we're more likely to notice any implementation
drift or unintended changes that affect those assumptions.  Moving code
generation into objtool would mean we were again relying on a single
-------------- 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/20210201/bac2542b/attachment.sig>

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list