On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 05:53:10PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 05:59:33PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
quoted
Some more explict pointer to live patching as the only user would
definitely be good but I think the more important thing would be writing
down any assumptions in the API that aren't already written down and
Something like so?
Yeah, looks reasonable - it'll need rebasing against current code as I
moved the docs in the source out of the arch code into the header this
cycle (they were copied verbatim in a couple of places).
#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_STACKWALK
/**
- * stack_trace_consume_fn - Callback for arch_stack_walk()
+ * stack_trace_consume_fn() - Callback for arch_stack_walk()
* @cookie: Caller supplied pointer handed back by arch_stack_walk()
* @addr: The stack entry address to consume
*
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ unsigned int stack_trace_save_user(unsigned long *store, unsigned int size);
*/
typedef bool (*stack_trace_consume_fn)(void *cookie, unsigned long addr);
/**
- * arch_stack_walk - Architecture specific function to walk the stack
+ * arch_stack_walk() - Architecture specific function to walk the stack
* @consume_entry: Callback which is invoked by the architecture code for
* each entry.
* @cookie: Caller supplied pointer which is handed back to
These two should be separated.