[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <89249a19-5fb9-86e3-925b-dbb03427f718@fb.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:25:09 +0000
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@...nel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: "daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
"Kernel Team" <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] libbpf: Collect static vs global info about
functions
On 1/8/20 2:25 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org> writes:
>
>> Collect static vs global information about BPF functions from ELF file and
>> improve BTF with this additional info if llvm is too old and doesn't emit it on
>> its own.
>
> Has the support for this actually landed in LLVM yet? I tried grep'ing
> in the commit log and couldn't find anything...
It has not landed yet. The commit link is:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71638
I will try to land the patch in the next couple of days once this series
of patch is merged or the principle of the patch is accepted.
>
> [...]
>> @@ -313,6 +321,7 @@ struct bpf_object {
>> bool loaded;
>> bool has_pseudo_calls;
>> bool relaxed_core_relocs;
>> + bool llvm_emits_func_linkage;
>
> Nit: s/llvm/compiler/? Presumably GCC will also support this at some
> point?
>
> -Toke
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists