lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 perf, bpf-next 1/4] perf, bpf: Introduce PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 06:56:11PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 12, 2018, at 10:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 05:09:17PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
> >>> And while this tracks the bpf kallsyms, it does not do all kallsyms.
> >>>
> >>> .... Oooh, I see the problem, everybody is doing their own custom
> >>> kallsym_{add,del}() thing, instead of having that in generic code :-(
> >>>
> >>> This, for example, doesn't track module load/unload nor ftrace
> >>> trampolines, even though both affect kallsyms.
> >>
> >> I think we can use PERF_RECORD_MMAP(or MMAP2) for module load/unload.
> >> That could be separate sets of patches.
> >
> > So I would actually like to move bpf_lock/bpf_kallsyms/bpf_tree +
> > bpf_prog_kallsyms_*() + __bpf_address_lookup() into kernel/kallsyms.c
> > and also have ftrace use that.
> >
> > Because currently the ftrace stuff is otherwise invisible.
> >
> > A generic kallsym register/unregister for any JIT.
>
> I guess this is _not_ a requirement for this patchset? BPF program has
> special data (id, sub_id, tag) that we need PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT. So
> this patchset should be orthogonal to the generic kallsym framework?

Well, it is a question of ABI. I don't like mixing the kallsym updates
with the BPF updates.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-12-13 16:27    [W:0.122 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site