On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 03:44:29AM +0000, Song Liu wrote: > > > > On Feb 5, 2019, at 7:36 PM, Alexei Starovoitov > > <alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 10:47:06PM +0000, Song Liu wrote: > >> Hi Alexei and Daniel, > >> > >> The following patches are required for BPF introspection in perf tools. > >> Please pull them to bpf-next, so that we get all the dependencies in one > >> tree. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Song > >> > >> (from 1/10 to 10/10) > >> 76193a94522f perf, bpf: Introduce PERF_RECORD_KSYMBOL > >> d764ac646491 tools headers uapi: Sync tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h > >> 6ee52e2a3fe4 perf, bpf: Introduce PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT > >> df063c83aa2c tools headers uapi: Sync tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h > >> 9aa0bfa370b2 perf tools: Handle PERF_RECORD_KSYMBOL > >> 45178a928a4b perf tools: Handle PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT > >> 7b612e291a5a perf tools: Synthesize PERF_RECORD_* for loaded BPF programs > >> a40b95bcd30c perf top: Synthesize BPF events for pre-existing loaded BPF > >> programs > >> 6934058d9fb6 bpf: Add module name [bpf] to ksymbols for bpf programs > >> 811184fb6977 perf bpf: Fix synthesized PERF_RECORD_KSYMBOL/BPF_EVENT > > > > yes. we can certainly do that. > > Do you have bpf specific patches that depend on that ? > > Since it's rc5 already. Are you planning to send them within next week? > > BPF introspection work depends on these patches. I have been hopping > between perf tree and bpf-next tree. I think basing the series up on > bpf-next plus these patches leads least conflicts. > > I do plan to send the series within next week. > > On a second thought, maybe I should send based on perf tree, and worry > about the conflicts later? It is really heavier on perf side.
whichever way is easier. if bpf-next is the best use that as a base with above patches. Once your set gets Acks from perf folks we can push above patches from tip first and then apply your set.
