Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 16 Feb 2024 20:29:02 +0800 | From | Leo Yan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Fixup module symbol end address properly |
| |
On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 09:19:51PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
[...]
> > On the other hand, I am a bit concern > > for a big function (e.g. its code size > 4KiB), we might fail to find > > symbols in this case with the change above. > > Yes, it's another problem. But it cannot know the exact size > so it just assumes it fits in a page.
Agreed.
> > > > If so, we should use a specific checking for eBPF program, e.g.: > > > > > > > > else if (prev_mod && strcmp(prev_mod, curr_mod) && > > > > (!strcmp(prev->name, "bpf") || > > > > !strcmp(curr->name, "bpf"))) > > > > > > I suspect it can happen on any module boundary so better > > > to handle it in a more general way. > > > > I don't want to introduce over complexity at here. We can apply > > current patch as it is. > > Good, can I get your Reviewed-by then? :)
Yes.
Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linux.dev>
> > A side topic, when I saw the code is hard coded for 4096 as the page > > size, this is not always true on Arm64 (the page size can be 4KiB, > > 16KiB or 64KiB). We need to consider to extend the environment for > > recording the system's page size. > > Sounds good. But until then, 4K would be the reasonable choice.
This is fine for me.
Thanks, Leo
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |