[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130924100620.GG15119@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:06:20 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@...aro.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"patches@...aro.org" <patches@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf tools: Check libunwind for availability of
dwarf parsing feature
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:34:50AM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:55:32AM +0200, Jean Pihet wrote:
> > Ping on the series. The two patches above (3/4 and 4/4) are generic
> > while the two others are impacting ARM only.
> > Is it possible to get an Ack for the generic ones?
>
> I'm fine with those changes.. still I'm sort of worried about
> current DWARF unwind users (but not sure if there're any),
> who depends on packaged libunwind compiled without
> --enable-debug-frame option.
Since x86 is the only architecture using libunwind with perf at the moment,
and I'd expect it to use .eh_frame for unwinding, I'm also not sure there
are any existing users to worry about.
> I've seen your libunwind patch to make it default, but
> not sure if it was accepted.. if not, maybe we should
> detect this and build that code conditionaly.
It certainly defaults to "on" for ARM, but other architectures have to
enable it explicitly afaict.
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists