On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 at 22:30, Eduard Zingerman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2025-10-08 at 22:08 +0200, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote: > > [...] > > > Since we're piling on ideas, one of the other things that I think > > could be useful in general (and maybe should be done orthogonally to > > bpf_errno) > > is making some empty nop function and making it not traceable reliably > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > You mean traceable, right? > So that user attaches a bpf program to it, > and debugs bpf programs using bpf programs?
Yeah, sorry, typo. > > > across arches and invoke it in the bpf exception handler. > > Then if we expose prog_stream_dump_stack() as a kfunc (should be > > trivial), the user can write anything to stderr that is relevant to > > get more information on the fault. > > > > It is then up to the user to decide the rate of messages for such > > faults etc. and get more information if needed.
