On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 08:54:23PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
int unwind_user_next(struct unwind_user_state *state)
{
+ struct unwind_user_frame *frame;
+ unsigned long cfa = 0, fp, ra = 0;
+
+ if (state->done)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (fp_state(state))
+ frame = &fp_frame;
+ else
+ goto the_end;
+
+ cfa = (frame->use_fp ? state->fp : state->sp) + frame->cfa_off;
+
+ /* stack going in wrong direction? */
+ if (cfa <= state->sp)
+ goto the_end;
+
+ if (get_user(ra, (unsigned long *)(cfa + frame->ra_off)))
+ goto the_end;
+
+ if (frame->fp_off && get_user(fp, (unsigned long __user *)(cfa + frame->fp_off)))
+ goto the_end;
+
+ state->ip = ra;
+ state->sp = cfa;
+ if (frame->fp_off)
+ state->fp = fp;
+
+ return 0;
+
+the_end:
+ state->done = true;
return -EINVAL;
}
I'm thinking 'the_end' might be better named 'done' ?
Also, CFA here is Call-Frame-Address and RA Return-Address ?