linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 1/9] perf tools: Add build id shell test

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: <CAP-5=fWM4X_AaFWc97s2m2KpEo7veE01gN9YQtnawbqQU=YH7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Oct 2020 08:22:23 -0700
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/9] perf tools: Add build id shell test

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:12 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 10:37:45AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 4:29 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 10:34:51AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > >
> > > SNIP
> > >
> > > > > > +
> > > > > >  LIBJVMTI = libperf-jvmti.so
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  ifndef NO_JVMTI
> > > > > > @@ -756,6 +763,13 @@ $(OUTPUT)perf-read-vdsox32: perf-read-vdso.c util/find-map.c
> > > > > >         $(QUIET_CC)$(CC) -mx32 $(filter -static,$(LDFLAGS)) -Wall -Werror -o $@ perf-read-vdso.c
> > > > > >  endif
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +ifndef NO_BUILDID_EX
> > > > > > +$(OUTPUT)buildid-ex-sha1:
> > > > > > +       $(QUIET_LINK)echo 'int main(void) { return 0; }' | $(CC) -Wl,--build-id=sha1 -o $@ -x c -
> > > > > > +$(OUTPUT)buildid-ex-md5:
> > > > > > +       $(QUIET_LINK)echo 'int main(void) { return 0; }' | $(CC) -Wl,--build-id=md5 -o $@ -x c -
> > > > > > +endif
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we just build them in the test shell script instead?
> > >
> > > it would solve the build-directory/install-directory
> > > lookup search.. but it'd need to do detect compiler
> > > and depend on it as Ian said
> > >
> > > do you have some other reason to compile it in test?
> >
> > No I just wanted to make it easy to find the binaries
> > and assumed a compiler is available in the test machine
> > (which is not true for my company setup.... :-/)
> >
> > But otherwise we should keep the binaries somewhere
> > in the install directory..
>
> hum, could we go in with the v3 and then you guys
> could customize it to what would work for you?

v3 is fine with me, it is progress to have a test. Longer term I hope
we can have binary dependencies on shell tests and get them installed,
etc. libperf would be a motivating case.

Acked-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>

Thanks,
Ian

> thanks,
> jirka
>