Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] libbpf: Collect static vs global info about functions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 05:57:55PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Jan 8, 2020, at 2:25 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> 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...
> > 
> > [...]
> >> @@ -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?
> 
> Echoing this nit (and other references to llvm). Otherwise,

sure. will rename to compiler, but I think you folks are overly optimistic
about gcc. Even basic stuff doesn't work yet. I doubt we will see BTF
emitted by gcc this year.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux