[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181109005535.GA6218@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:55:35 -0800
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, namhyung@...nel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: PEBS level 2/3 breaks dwarf unwinding! [WAS: Re: Broken dwarf
unwinding - wrong stack pointer register value?]
> Can we change this, such that perf_event_output also takes a second set of
> registers (iregs) that get sampled for PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_INTR? I'm very new to
> real kernel development, what kind of ABI/API stability guarantees exist for
> something like "perf_event_output"?
Yes you can change it.
That's no API/ABI stability guarantee for kernel internal functions,
as long as you change all callers in tree.
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists