linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] perf report: Support LLVM for addr2line()

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: <ZlczO4D8J1lgWBZj@x1>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 10:52:59 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@...gle.com>,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	irogers@...gle.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] perf report: Support LLVM for addr2line()

On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 08:56:47PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 11:22 AM Steinar H. Gunderson <sesse@...gle.com> wrote:
> > +#elif defined(HAVE_LIBBFD_SUPPORT)
 
> Hmm.. it's unfortunate that we have only one addr2line
> implementation at a time.  Maybe we can do the same thing
> like in annotate with objdump so that it can fallback to another
> method when failing.  But it'd require more changes beyond
> this work and I'm not sure if it's really worth it.

Right, I think we shouldn't delay processing these patches because of
that, we can do it as follow up patches, both for fallbacks in case we
can detect problems like we did with capstone -> objdump disasm and also
to be able to compare outputs in 'perf test' shell scripts, discounting
known/expected minor differences.

- Arnaldo