[PATCH 4/6] arm64: stacktrace: rename unwinder functions
Mark Rutland
mark.rutland at arm.com
Wed Apr 13 07:59:08 PDT 2022
From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka at linux.microsoft.com>
Rename unwinder functions for consistency and better naming.
- Rename start_backtrace() to unwind_init().
- Rename unwind_frame() to unwind_next().
- Rename walk_stackframe() to unwind().
There should be no functional change as a result of this patch.
Signed-off-by: Madhavan T. Venkataraman <madvenka at linux.microsoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
index 073d0941a5b6..d65fde99b74a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
@@ -50,8 +50,8 @@ struct stackframe {
#endif
};
-static notrace void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp,
- unsigned long pc)
+static notrace void unwind_init(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp,
+ unsigned long pc)
{
frame->fp = fp;
frame->pc = pc;
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ static notrace void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp,
/*
* Prime the first unwind.
*
- * In unwind_frame() we'll check that the FP points to a valid stack,
+ * In unwind_next() we'll check that the FP points to a valid stack,
* which can't be STACK_TYPE_UNKNOWN, and the first unwind will be
* treated as a transition to whichever stack that happens to be. The
* prev_fp value won't be used, but we set it to 0 such that it is
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static notrace void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp,
frame->prev_fp = 0;
frame->prev_type = STACK_TYPE_UNKNOWN;
}
-NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(start_backtrace);
+NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_init);
/*
* Unwind from one frame record (A) to the next frame record (B).
@@ -81,8 +81,8 @@ NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(start_backtrace);
* records (e.g. a cycle), determined based on the location and fp value of A
* and the location (but not the fp value) of B.
*/
-static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk,
- struct stackframe *frame)
+static int notrace unwind_next(struct task_struct *tsk,
+ struct stackframe *frame)
{
unsigned long fp = frame->fp;
struct stack_info info;
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk,
/*
* Record this frame record's values and location. The prev_fp and
- * prev_type are only meaningful to the next unwind_frame() invocation.
+ * prev_type are only meaningful to the next unwind_next() invocation.
*/
frame->fp = READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(*(unsigned long *)(fp));
frame->pc = READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(*(unsigned long *)(fp + 8));
@@ -155,23 +155,23 @@ static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk,
return 0;
}
-NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_frame);
+NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_next);
-static void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk,
- struct stackframe *frame,
- bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), void *data)
+static void notrace unwind(struct task_struct *tsk,
+ struct stackframe *frame,
+ bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), void *data)
{
while (1) {
int ret;
if (!fn(data, frame->pc))
break;
- ret = unwind_frame(tsk, frame);
+ ret = unwind_next(tsk, frame);
if (ret < 0)
break;
}
}
-NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(walk_stackframe);
+NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind);
static bool dump_backtrace_entry(void *arg, unsigned long where)
{
@@ -213,14 +213,14 @@ noinline notrace void arch_stack_walk(stack_trace_consume_fn consume_entry,
struct stackframe frame;
if (regs)
- start_backtrace(&frame, regs->regs[29], regs->pc);
+ unwind_init(&frame, regs->regs[29], regs->pc);
else if (task == current)
- start_backtrace(&frame,
+ unwind_init(&frame,
(unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(1),
(unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0));
else
- start_backtrace(&frame, thread_saved_fp(task),
+ unwind_init(&frame, thread_saved_fp(task),
thread_saved_pc(task));
- walk_stackframe(task, &frame, consume_entry, cookie);
+ unwind(task, &frame, consume_entry, cookie);
}
--
2.30.2
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list