Hi Alexei, On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:43 AM Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:50:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:05:51PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > > Namhyung Kim (8): > > > perf/core: Save the dynamic parts of sample data size > > > perf/core: Add perf_sample_save_callchain() helper > > > perf/core: Add perf_sample_save_raw_data() helper > > > perf/core: Add perf_sample_save_brstack() helper > > > perf/core: Set data->sample_flags in perf_prepare_sample() > > > perf/core: Do not pass header for sample id init > > > perf/core: Introduce perf_prepare_header() > > > perf/core: Call perf_prepare_sample() before running BPF > > > > Thanks!, > > > > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks Peter. > The patches look good to me as well. > How do you want to route them bpf-next or tip ? > > Namhyung, > I'd also like to see a follow up patch with a selftest/bpf for this. > > BPF CI didn't have a chance to really test the set, since > there is a build issue on s390 due to llvm upstream repo. > We're aware and working on that. Yep, I'll add a test case as soon as it gets the change. Thanks, Namhyung
