Hello Steve! On 01.07.2025 20:49, Steven Rostedt wrote: > This code is based on top of: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/[email protected]/ > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace.git > unwind/core > > This is the implementation of parsing the SFrame section in an ELF file.
... > The code for this patch series can be found here: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace.git > unwind/sframe Wouldn't it make sense to include your related perf (tools) series [1] in that branch to ease testing? Provided you also include the minor fix [2] to make perf tools work. :-) Additionally it would make sense to include the patches from Josh that add SFrame information to the vDSO on x86 [3]. [1]: [PATCH v12 00/11] perf: Support the deferred unwinding infrastructure, https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/[email protected]/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/[email protected]/ [3]: [PATCH v6 0/6] x86/vdso: VDSO updates and fixes for sframes, https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > Changes since v6: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/[email protected]/ > - Moved the addition of the prctl(), that allows libraries to add the elf > sections to the kernel, to the last patch and labeled it as "DO NOT APPLY". > This should instead be a proper system call and work to make it robust and > flexible still needs to be done. The prctl() patch is added for debugging > purposes only. Does PR_SET_VMA [4] create a precedent case for the SFrame prctls? [4]: https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/pr_set_vma.2const.html Thanks and regards, Jens -- Jens Remus Linux on Z Development (D3303) +49-7031-16-1128 Office [email protected] IBM IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH; Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Wolfgang Wendt; Geschäftsführung: David Faller; Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen; Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 IBM Data Privacy Statement: https://www.ibm.com/privacy/
