[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251023102332.7b7f1241@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 10:23:32 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Fangrui Song <maskray@...rceware.org>
Cc: Jens Remus <jremus@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...nel.org>, Josh Poimboeuf
<jpoimboe@...nel.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu
Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Peter Zijlstra
<peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa
<jolsa@...nel.org>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung
Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Andrii
Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@...cle.com>, "Jose
E. Marchesi" <jemarch@....org>, Beau Belgrave <beaub@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, Kees Cook
<kees@...nel.org>, Carlos O'Donell <codonell@...hat.com>, Sam James
<sam@...too.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, "H.
Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Michal Hocko
<mhocko@...e.com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Suren Baghdasaryan
<surenb@...gle.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Heiko Carstens
<hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/15] unwind_deferred: Implement sframe handling
On Thu, 23 Oct 2025 01:09:02 -0700
Fangrui Song <maskray@...rceware.org> wrote:
> Please consider dropping the statement, "soon will also be supported by LLVM."
> Speaking as LLVM's MC, lld/ELF, and binary utilities maintainer, I have
> significant concerns about the v2 format, specifically its apparent
> disregard for standard ELF and linker conventions
> (https://maskray.me/blog/2025-09-28-remarks-on-sframe#linking-and-execution-views)
Please note, v2 can be dropped entirely. There's no plans to have the Linux
kernel ship with v2. The patches for v2 for the Linux kernel are for
testing purposes only (which was what help find the issues with v2).
The plan is to have v3 be the first versions supported by an official
release of the Linux kernel with the assumptions that changes after v3 will
be minimal.
The reason there was such a big difference between v2 and v3 is because v2
was the first version to have a consumer try to use it in a more production
like environment. This found several corner cases that needed to be
addressed, and that the current layout of v2 was not acceptable.
No linker needs to support v2 as there will be no consumers of it.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists