On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 03:15:39AM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 5:57 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > hi, > > we have a use cases for bpf programs to use binary file's build id. > > > > After some attempts to add helpers/kfuncs [1] [2] Andrii had an idea [3] > > to store build id directly in the file object. That would solve our use > > case and might be beneficial for other profiling/tracing use cases with > > bpf programs. > > > > This RFC patchset adds new config CONFIG_FILE_BUILD_ID option, which adds > > build id object pointer to the file object when enabled. The build id is > > read/populated when the file is mmap-ed. > > > > I also added bpf and perf changes that would benefit from this. > > > > I'm not sure what's the policy on adding stuff to file object, so apologies > > if that's out of line. I'm open to any feedback or suggestions if there's > > better place or way to do this. > > struct file represents all files while build_id is for executables only, > and not all executables, but those currently running, so > I think it's cleaner to put it into vm_area_struct. There can be many vm_area_structs per file, and like for struct file, there's vm_area_structs for non-executable ranges too. Given there's only one buildid per file, struct file seems most appropriate to me.
