On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 3:34 PM Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 3:04 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Ian, > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 5:42 PM Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 2:05 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > Sometimes we want to convert an address in objdump output to > > > > map-relative address to match with a sample data. Let's add > > > > map__objdump_2rip() for that. > > > > > > Hi Namhyung, > > > > > > I think the naming can be better here. Aren't the objdump addresses > > > DSO relative offsets? Is the relative IP relative to the map or the > > > DSO? > > > > AFAIK the objdump addresses are DSO-relative and rip is to map. > > They are mostly the same but sometimes different due to kASLR > > for the kernel. > > Perhaps we need to use names like map_rip for mapping relative and > dso_rip to clean this up, or to add a different mapping_type to the > enum. For non-kernel maps addresses for map are either the whole > virtual address space (identity) or relative to a dso: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/util/map.h?h=perf-tools-next#n115 > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/util/map.h?h=perf-tools-next#n20 > The dso addresses should work for objdump so perhaps the kernel > addresses need map__pgoff fixing? I'm not sure about the vDSO case. By the way, I need to take a look if we can make this objdump-rip thing simpler as you mentioned. My feeling is that it can be done but I'd like to do it in a separate work and to move this forward. Thanks, Namhyung
|