Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:55:09 -0700 (PDT) | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] oProfile: oops when profile_pc() return ~0LU |
| |
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Philippe Elie wrote: > > For the signed-offs I thought the From: was an implicit Signed-offs.
No, there are no implicit sign-offs. The point of sign-offs is that it makes the copyright and flow of patches explicit, so an "implicit sign-off" would defeat the whole point.
> Test was done privately, Sami helped to narrow down the trouble, but > he didn't test the last patch, nothing bad on Sami side, I was too > confident the fix was obvious after narrowing it.
Well, I just wanted an ack that it was tested, since it seemed a bit subtle and (like the sign-offs) that explicit "yes, this was tested" was missing. Looks like I was right in asking for it:
> > The previous patch I tested by Philippe, oprof-fix-profile_pc-use.patch, > > worked ok, but with this latest patch oprofiled aborts. > > But kernel does not oops or print msgs. > > argh, I just moved the wrong eip from kernel to user space where the same > problem occur too, *sighs*, since I can't reproduce Sami problem, my own > test obviously worked... > > Sami, can you test this new patch. After testing can you report > the contents of /dev/oprofile/stats/cpu*/sample_invalid_eip ? > > Linus, there is two way to fix this problem, the attached patch fix it > by sanitizing the sampled eip,
I'm perfectly happy with the attached patch, I just want it to be properly tested and have all the sign-offs (and explanations etc) in place, and I can apply it.
Of course, I cannot think of a single architecture where an EIP of ~0UL is valid anyway, so I'm also not opposed to just keeping ~0UL as the magic value.
Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |