On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 07:44:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:33:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > What did you think about .static_call_tramp_key? I could whip up a > > patch later unless you beat me to it. > > Yeah, I'm not sure.. why duplicate information already present in > kallsyms?
Well, but it's not exactly duplicating kallsyms. No need to store symbol names, just the pointer relationships. And kallsyms is presumably slow. > There's a fair number of features that already require KALLSYMS, I can't > really be bothered about adding one more (kprobes, function_tracer, > stack_tracer, ftrace_syscalls). Right, but I don't think they rely on KALLSYMS_ALL? -- Josh
