[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3D79DAF3-0746-41A2-B902-E1D99F098AF9@fb.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:56:11 +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>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 perf, bpf-next 1/4] perf, bpf: Introduce
PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT
> On Dec 12, 2018, at 10:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 05:09:17PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>>> And while this tracks the bpf kallsyms, it does not do all kallsyms.
>>>
>>> .... Oooh, I see the problem, everybody is doing their own custom
>>> kallsym_{add,del}() thing, instead of having that in generic code :-(
>>>
>>> This, for example, doesn't track module load/unload nor ftrace
>>> trampolines, even though both affect kallsyms.
>>
>> I think we can use PERF_RECORD_MMAP(or MMAP2) for module load/unload.
>> That could be separate sets of patches.
>
> So I would actually like to move bpf_lock/bpf_kallsyms/bpf_tree +
> bpf_prog_kallsyms_*() + __bpf_address_lookup() into kernel/kallsyms.c
> and also have ftrace use that.
>
> Because currently the ftrace stuff is otherwise invisible.
>
> A generic kallsym register/unregister for any JIT.
I guess this is _not_ a requirement for this patchset? BPF program has
special data (id, sub_id, tag) that we need PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT. So
this patchset should be orthogonal to the generic kallsym framework?
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists