Re: [PATCH v2] ftrace: Hide a extra entry in stack trace

[Tatsuya S]

On 10/1/24 10:47 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 22:27:03 +0900
ts <tatsuya.s2...@gmail.com> wrote:

...
                sh-140     [001] ...1.    18.352601: myevent: 
(vfs_write+0x4/0x560)
                sh-140     [001] ...1.    18.352602: <stack trace>
   => ksys_write
   => do_syscall_64
   => entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
                sh-140     [001] ...1.    18.352602: vfs_write <-ksys_write
                sh-140     [001] ...1.    18.352604: <stack trace>
   => ftrace_regs_call
   => vfs_write
   => ksys_write
   => do_syscall_64
   => entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
------
As you can see, myevent skips "vfs_write".
(and function tracer still have ftrace_regs_call() )

Thanks for the other tests. This issue may be function_trace_call()
specific problem.

So I will change the place to increment skip number.

My fear is that we are going to just break it elsewhere. The problem with
the "skip" is that there's so many configurations when we get here, we may
not really know what to skip. If the compiler inlines something, then we
may skip something we do not want to.

I rather have extra information than not enough.

-- Steve

It may not be clean and be bit redundant, but I think it would be more 
maintainable to treat

"skip(and skipped functions)" separately only at the top(parent) of 
functions that display stack trace.


thanks.