[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200709143654.pw2maoxivsjho6op@two.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:36:54 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf-probe: Warn if the target function is GNU
Indirect function
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c
> index 1e95a336862c..671176d39569 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c
> @@ -379,6 +379,11 @@ static int find_alternative_probe_point(struct debuginfo *dinfo,
> address = sym->start;
> else
> address = map->unmap_ip(map, sym->start) - map->reloc;
> + if (sym->type == STT_GNU_IFUNC) {
> + pr_warning("Warning: The probe address (0x%lx) is in a GNU indirect function.\n"
> + "This may not work as you expected unless you intend to probe the indirect function.\n",
I would say something like this.
Consider identifying the final function used at run time and set the
probe directly on that.
I think that's more useful to the user.
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists