lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [tip:perf/core] perf/headers: Sync new perf_event.h with the tools/include/uapi version

* Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 03:52:59AM -0800, tip-bot for Song Liu wrote:
> > Commit-ID: 0d8dd67be013727ae57645ecd3ea2c36365d7da8
> > Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/0d8dd67be013727ae57645ecd3ea2c36365d7da8
> > Author: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> > AuthorDate: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 14:45:14 -0800
> > Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > CommitDate: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 10:18:05 +0100
>
> any chance these patches can still make into this release considering
> they were ready back in December ?

The actual kernel side patches were only applied a week ago:

33ea4b24277b: perf/core: Implement the 'perf_uprobe' PMU

include/linux/trace_events.h | 4 ++++
kernel/events/core.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
kernel/trace/trace_probe.h | 4 ++++
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
5 files changed, 186 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

e12f03d7031a: perf/core: Implement the 'perf_kprobe' PMU

include/linux/trace_events.h | 4 ++++
kernel/events/core.c | 142 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------------
kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
kernel/trace/trace_probe.h | 7 +++++++
5 files changed, 250 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)

Commit: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitDate: Tue Feb 6 11:29:28 2018 +0100

They are also large and complex, so I can only send this to Linus in the v4.17
merge window.

> We have few followups for them and if we don't get them via Linus's tree
> into net-next/bpf-next we cannot really proceed further.
> The other option would be to cherry-pick them into bpf-next/net-next,
> but also a bit scary due to potential conflicts?

No cherry-picking of such large patches please.

But I suppose you could git-pull tip:perf/core into the BPF tree, it only has
these changes:

33ea4b24277b: perf/core: Implement the 'perf_uprobe' PMU
e12f03d7031a: perf/core: Implement the 'perf_kprobe' PMU
0d8dd67be013: perf/headers: Sync new perf_event.h with the tools/include/uapi version
65074d43fc77: perf/core: Prepare perf_event.h for new types: 'perf_kprobe' and 'perf_uprobe'

... on top of an upstream commit (59410f5ac70a).

The risks are:

- In the v4.17 merge window the BPF tree should only be sent to Linus once he has
pulled the perf tree - i.e. there's a dependency.

- If any of these commits needs serious fixes or a revert then that would have to
be pulled into the BPF tree too later on. (I don't expect there to be many
problems though, no regression was reported so far.)

Thanks,

Ingo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-14 08:52    [W:0.043 / U:2.192 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site