Em Wed, May 11, 2022 at 09:35:34AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 04:48:55PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 12:47 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > hi, > > > sending change we discussed some time ago [1] to get rid of > > > some deprecated functions we use in perf prologue code. > > > > > > Despite the gloomy discussion I think the final code does > > > not look that bad ;-) > > > > > > This patchset removes following libbpf functions from perf: > > > bpf_program__set_prep > > > bpf_program__nth_fd > > > struct bpf_prog_prep_result > > > > > > v2 changes: > > > - use fallback section prog handler, so we don't need to > > > use section prefix [Andrii] > > > - realloc prog->insns array in bpf_program__set_insns [Andrii] > > > - squash patch 1 from previous version with > > > bpf_program__set_insns change [Daniel] > > > - patch 3 already merged [Arnaldo] > > > - added more comments > > > > > > meanwhile.. perf/core and bpf-next diverged, so: > > > - libbpf bpf_program__set_insns change is based on bpf-next/master > > > - perf changes do not apply on bpf-next/master so they are based on > > > perf/core ... however they can be merged only after we release > > > libbpf 0.8.0 with bpf_program__set_insns change, so we don't break > > > the dynamic linking > > > I'm sending perf changes now just for review, I'll resend them > > > once libbpf 0.8.0 is released > > > > > > thanks, > > > jirka > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzaiBO3_617kkXZdYJ8hS8YF--ZLgapNbgeeEJ-pY0H88g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > --- > > > Jiri Olsa (1): > > > libbpf: Add bpf_program__set_insns function > > > > > > > The first patch looks good to me. The rest I can't really review and > > test properly, so I'll leave it up to Arnaldo. > > > > Arnaldo, how do we coordinate these patches? Should they go through > > bpf-next (after you Ack them) or you want them in your tree? > > > > I'd like to get the bpf_program__set_insns() patch into bpf-next so > > that I can do libbpf v0.8 release, having it in a separate tree is > > extremely inconvenient. Please let me know how you think we should > > proceed? > > we need to wait with perf changes after the libbpf is merged and > libbpf 0.8.0 is released.. so we don't break dynamic linking for > perf > > at the moment please just take libbpf change and I'll resend the > perf change later if needed Ok. - Arnaldo
