linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 13/14] perf callchain: Support x86 target platform

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160601124750.GO2563@kernel.org>
Date:	Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:47:50 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:	He Kuang <hekuang@...wei.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
	wangnan0@...wei.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
	eranian@...gle.com, namhyung@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
	sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com,
	tumanova@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, kan.liang@...el.com,
	penberg@...nel.org, dsahern@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 13/14] perf callchain: Support x86 target platform

Em Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 10:40:15AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:19:11AM +0000, He Kuang wrote:
 
> SNIP
> > +  ifeq ($(feature-libunwind-x86), 1)
> > +    $(call detected,CONFIG_LIBUNWIND_X86)
> > +    CFLAGS += -DHAVE_LIBUNWIND_X86_SUPPORT
> > +    LDFLAGS += -lunwind-x86
> > +    have_libunwind = 1
> > +  endif

> >    ifneq ($(feature-libunwind), 1)
> >      msg := $(warning No libunwind found. Please install libunwind-dev[el] >= 1.1 and/or set LIBUNWIND_DIR);
> >      NO_LOCAL_LIBUNWIND := 1
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/Build
> > @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ libperf-$(CONFIG_DWARF) += dwarf-aux.o
> >  libperf-$(CONFIG_LIBDW_DWARF_UNWIND) += unwind-libdw.o
> >  libperf-$(CONFIG_LOCAL_LIBUNWIND)    += unwind-libunwind-local.o
> >  libperf-$(CONFIG_LIBUNWIND)          += unwind-libunwind.o
> > +libperf-$(CONFIG_LIBUNWIND_X86)      += libunwind/x86_32.o
> 
> seems odd but I dont have any better idea.. let's see what
> others have to say ;-)

There was a lot of discussion in this patchkit, so I lost track of why I
should consider the above odd :-)

I.e. I take the above as: if x86 libunwind was detected or explicitely
selected, link support for it when generating the perf tool in any
architecture, which seems sensible, no?

- Arnaldo