[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMEtUuyCmO+N2SOTNXfOVnRA59TWsZczPCJBWsB+h0E45NxHPA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 21:47:42 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 linux-trace 4/8] samples: bpf: simple tracing example
in C
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> wrote:
> I thought we already stated that.
> Here is the quote from perf_event.h:
> * # The RAW record below is opaque data wrt the ABI
> * #
> * # That is, the ABI doesn't make any promises wrt to
> * # the stability of its content, it may vary depending
> * # on event, hardware, kernel version and phase of
> * # the moon.
> * #
> * # In other words, PERF_SAMPLE_RAW contents are not an ABI.
>
> and this example is reading PERF_SAMPLE_RAW events and
> uses locally defined structs to print them for simplicity.
to underline my point once more:
addition of bpf doesn't change at all what PERF_SAMPLE_RAW already
delivers to user space.
so no new ABIs anywhere.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists