[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 16:49:18 +0000
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 perf, bpf-next 1/4] perf, bpf: Introduce
PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT
> On Dec 12, 2018, at 4:06 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:33:47PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
>> +static void perf_event_bpf_output(struct perf_event *event,
>> + void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct perf_bpf_event *bpf_event = data;
>> + struct perf_output_handle handle;
>> + struct perf_sample_data sample;
>> + char name[KSYM_NAME_LEN];
>> + int name_len;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + if (!perf_event_bpf_match(event))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + /* get prog name and round up to 64 bit aligned */
>> + bpf_get_prog_name(bpf_event->prog, name);
>> + name_len = strlen(name) + 1;
>> + while (!IS_ALIGNED(name_len, sizeof(u64)))
>> + name[name_len++] = '\0';
>
> Does this not require something like:
>
> BUILD_BUG_ON(KSYM_NAME_LEN % sizeof(u64));
Yeah, this makes sense. I will add this in next version.
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists