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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <A6EB5CAD-BF0B-4C8C-8BD8-9703DFE7E0C7@fb.com> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 03:44:29 +0000 From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com> To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> CC: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Pull patches from tip/perf/core to bpf-next > On Feb 5, 2019, at 7:36 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 10:47:06PM +0000, Song Liu wrote: >> Hi Alexei and Daniel, >> >> The following patches are required for BPF introspection in perf tools. >> Please pull them to bpf-next, so that we get all the dependencies in one >> tree. >> >> Thanks, >> Song >> >> (from 1/10 to 10/10) >> 76193a94522f perf, bpf: Introduce PERF_RECORD_KSYMBOL >> d764ac646491 tools headers uapi: Sync tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> 6ee52e2a3fe4 perf, bpf: Introduce PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT >> df063c83aa2c tools headers uapi: Sync tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> 9aa0bfa370b2 perf tools: Handle PERF_RECORD_KSYMBOL >> 45178a928a4b perf tools: Handle PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT >> 7b612e291a5a perf tools: Synthesize PERF_RECORD_* for loaded BPF programs >> a40b95bcd30c perf top: Synthesize BPF events for pre-existing loaded BPF programs >> 6934058d9fb6 bpf: Add module name [bpf] to ksymbols for bpf programs >> 811184fb6977 perf bpf: Fix synthesized PERF_RECORD_KSYMBOL/BPF_EVENT > > yes. we can certainly do that. > Do you have bpf specific patches that depend on that ? > Since it's rc5 already. Are you planning to send them within next week? BPF introspection work depends on these patches. I have been hopping between perf tree and bpf-next tree. I think basing the series up on bpf-next plus these patches leads least conflicts. I do plan to send the series within next week. On a second thought, maybe I should send based on perf tree, and worry about the conflicts later? It is really heavier on perf side. Thanks, Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists