Re: [PATCH 7/7] Allow unwind_stack() to return ra for leaf function

[Franck Bui-Huu <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>]

Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 21:38:18 +0200, "Franck Bui-Huu" <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>> Considering (wrongly) a nested function as a leaf one is not a big
>> issue. "ra" reg should _always_ store a valid address (nested or not).
>> The only (small) impact would be to skip an entry when showing the
>> backtrace.
> 
> The unwind_stack() uses regs->regs[31] for a leaf, and regs->regs[31]
> always holds RA value of _top_ of the stack, not at that level.
> 

does something like this on top of this patch make you feel better ?

-- >8 --

diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/process.c b/arch/mips/kernel/process.c
index 4ceddfa..8a9db45 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/process.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/process.c
@@ -480,7 +480,13 @@ unsigned long unwind_stack(struct task_s
                return 0;
 
        if (leaf)
-               pc = regs->regs[31];
+               /*
+                * For some extreme cases, get_frame_info() can
+                * consider wrongly a nested function as a leaf
+                * one. In that cases avoid to return always the
+                * same value.
+                */
+               pc = pc != regs->regs[31] ? regs->regs[31] : 0;
        else
                pc = (*sp)[info.pc_offset];