linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 13/18] perf build: Remove libbfd support

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=fW9nM9zoQ5SQOq2HQfkougRotm=EBw99cvGDOpD=giK2g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 17:40:44 -0800
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, 
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, 
	Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>, Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, 
	Aditya Gupta <adityag@...ux.ibm.com>, "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@...gle.com>, 
	Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>, Changbin Du <changbin.du@...wei.com>, 
	"Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>, James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>, 
	Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>, Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, 
	Li Huafei <lihuafei1@...wei.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, 
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Chaitanya S Prakash <chaitanyas.prakash@....com>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, 
	llvm@...ts.linux.dev, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/18] perf build: Remove libbfd support

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 4:31 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz> wrote:
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 09:43:03AM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > libbfd is license incompatible with perf and building requires the
> > BUILD_NONDISTRO=1 build flag. Remove the code to simplify the code
> > base.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/Documentation/perf-check.txt |   1 -
> >  tools/perf/Makefile.config              |  38 +---
> >  tools/perf/builtin-check.c              |   1 -
> >  tools/perf/tests/Build                  |   1 -
> >  tools/perf/tests/builtin-test.c         |   1 -
> >  tools/perf/tests/pe-file-parsing.c      | 101 ----------
> >  tools/perf/tests/tests.h                |   1 -
> >  tools/perf/util/demangle-cxx.cpp        |  13 +-
> >  tools/perf/util/disasm_bpf.c            | 166 ----------------
> >  tools/perf/util/srcline.c               | 243 +-----------------------
> >  tools/perf/util/symbol-elf.c            |  86 +--------
> >  tools/perf/util/symbol.c                | 135 -------------
> >  tools/perf/util/symbol.h                |   4 -
> >  13 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 784 deletions(-)
> >  delete mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/pe-file-parsing.c
>
> [..]
>
> I was briefly investigating why the centos build of perf was not
> demangling rust v0 symbols [0]. From looking at the rust issue [1], it
> appears the rust team somehow delivered support for v0 demangling
> through libbfd. The code itself looked a bit odd (relying on cxx
> demangle to run first?), but that's a separate thing.

There is still C++ demangling support by way of cxxabi:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/util/demangle-cxx.cpp?h=perf-tools-next#n44
that was in libstdc++ (GNU) and libcxx (LLVM) when I looked.

> The centos build does not build with libbfd for the license issues you
> mentioned. So your change probably won't regress any distro use cases.
> But it does remove support for motivated users who don't have
> re-distribution requirements.
>
> But since this patchset came up first in my search, I thought it'd be
> good to mention that someone probably needs to add v0 support to
> tools/perf/util/demangle-rust.c.

So I don't see any libbfd dependencies in demangle-rust.c:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/util/demangle-rust.c?h=perf-tools-next#n8
Unusually we don't have any tests on the Rust demangling, we do for
Java and OCaml:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/tests/demangle-java-test.c?h=perf-tools-next
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/tests/demangle-ocaml-test.c?h=perf-tools-next

Reading a bit more it seems that previous libiberty was coming to the
rescue by way of C++ demangling. I'll see if I can write a demangler
by way of lex and yacc. If we have a v0 standard one is there any
value in the existing demangler or legacy demangling? It seems this
has been broken for the best part of 5 years.

Thanks,
Ian

> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
>
> [0]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/symbol-mangling/v0.html
> [1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60705