[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fVH-YG65AmFz-N0uSXg2OcGJrmkw5tQtuEuFY=h_4K8_g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 08:18:23 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf bpf: Move BPF disassembly routines to separate
file to avoid clash with capstone bpf headers
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:51 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 10:07:50AM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 8:12 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
[snip]
> > I think this can be gated by LIBBFD and LIBBPF config, but not sure
> > it can express the both requirements easily.
>
> It is possible, but as discussed with Ian in another message, the
> cheapest way to do it was, I think, like I did, in the end it is just a
> stub returning an error when those libraries are not linked with perf.
>
> When we manage to implement the disassembly of BPF using something other
> than libbfd we can spend more time in this area, I think.
Not following this, can you show an example perf command. There is a
BPF disassembler already in the kernel tree:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/kernel/bpf/disasm.c?h=perf-tools-next
and in use in bpftool that we use in the perf build.
Thanks,
Ian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists