1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. View series

[PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes

Andres Freund posted 8 patches 3 years, 8 months ago 
tools/bpf/Makefile                            |  7 ++-
tools/bpf/bpf_jit_disasm.c                    |  5 +-
tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile                    |  8 ++-
tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c                | 42 +++++++++++---
tools/build/Makefile.feature                  |  4 +-
tools/build/feature/Makefile                  |  4 ++
tools/build/feature/test-all.c                |  4 ++
.../feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c   | 13 +++++
tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h          | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
tools/perf/Makefile.config                    |  8 +++
tools/perf/util/annotate.c                    |  7 ++-
11 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c
create mode 100644 tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h
[PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Andres Freund 3 years, 8 months ago 
binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
binutils commit:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07

I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
looks nicer this way.

I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
bit off...

I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?

WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,
nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...

V2:
- split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
  separate
- included a bit more information about tests I did in commit messages
- add a maybe_unused to fprintf_json_styled's style argument

V3:
- don't include dis-asm-compat.h when building without libbfd
  (Ben Hutchings)
- don't include compiler.h in dis-asm-compat.h, use (void) casts instead,
  to avoid compiler.h include due to potential licensing conflict
- dual-license dis-asm-compat.h, for better compatibility with the rest of
  bpftool's code (suggested by Quentin Monnet)
- don't display feature-disassembler-init-styled test
  (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
- don't display feature-disassembler-four-args test, I split this for the
  different subsystems, but maybe that's overkill? (suggested by Jiri Olsa)

Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
CC: Ben Hutchings <benh@debian.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220622181918.ykrs5rsnmx3og4sv@alap3.anarazel.de
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+icZUVpr8ZeOKCj4zMMqbFT013KJz2T1csvXg+VSkdvJH1Ubw@mail.gmail.com

Andres Freund (8):
  tools build: Add feature test for init_disassemble_info API changes
  tools build: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
  tools include: add dis-asm-compat.h to handle version differences
  tools perf: Fix compilation error with new binutils
  tools bpf_jit_disasm: Fix compilation error with new binutils
  tools bpf_jit_disasm: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature
    test
  tools bpftool: Fix compilation error with new binutils
  tools bpftool: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test

 tools/bpf/Makefile                            |  7 ++-
 tools/bpf/bpf_jit_disasm.c                    |  5 +-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile                    |  8 ++-
 tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c                | 42 +++++++++++---
 tools/build/Makefile.feature                  |  4 +-
 tools/build/feature/Makefile                  |  4 ++
 tools/build/feature/test-all.c                |  4 ++
 .../feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c   | 13 +++++
 tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h          | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
 tools/perf/Makefile.config                    |  8 +++
 tools/perf/util/annotate.c                    |  7 ++-
 11 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c
 create mode 100644 tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h

-- 
2.37.0.3.g30cc8d0f14
Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo 3 years, 8 months ago 
Em Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:38:26PM -0700, Andres Freund escreveu:
> binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
> compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
> binutils commit:
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07
> 
> I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
> Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
> much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
> tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
> looks nicer this way.
> 
> I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
> bit off...
> 
> I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?

I think its ok
 
> WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,

I think its related to libbfd, and it comes from a long time ago, trying
to find the cset adding that...

> nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
> in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...
> 
> V2:
> - split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
>   separate

Cool, thanks, I'll process the first 4 patches, then at some point the
bpftool bits can be merged, alternatively I can process those as well if
the bpftool maintainers are ok with it.

I'll just wait a bit to see if Jiri and others have something to say.

- Arnaldo

> - included a bit more information about tests I did in commit messages
> - add a maybe_unused to fprintf_json_styled's style argument
> 
> V3:
> - don't include dis-asm-compat.h when building without libbfd
>   (Ben Hutchings)
> - don't include compiler.h in dis-asm-compat.h, use (void) casts instead,
>   to avoid compiler.h include due to potential licensing conflict
> - dual-license dis-asm-compat.h, for better compatibility with the rest of
>   bpftool's code (suggested by Quentin Monnet)
> - don't display feature-disassembler-init-styled test
>   (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
> - don't display feature-disassembler-four-args test, I split this for the
>   different subsystems, but maybe that's overkill? (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
> 
> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> Cc: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
> Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
> CC: Ben Hutchings <benh@debian.org>
> Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220622181918.ykrs5rsnmx3og4sv@alap3.anarazel.de
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+icZUVpr8ZeOKCj4zMMqbFT013KJz2T1csvXg+VSkdvJH1Ubw@mail.gmail.com
> 
> Andres Freund (8):
>   tools build: Add feature test for init_disassemble_info API changes
>   tools build: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
>   tools include: add dis-asm-compat.h to handle version differences
>   tools perf: Fix compilation error with new binutils
>   tools bpf_jit_disasm: Fix compilation error with new binutils
>   tools bpf_jit_disasm: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature
>     test
>   tools bpftool: Fix compilation error with new binutils
>   tools bpftool: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
> 
>  tools/bpf/Makefile                            |  7 ++-
>  tools/bpf/bpf_jit_disasm.c                    |  5 +-
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile                    |  8 ++-
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c                | 42 +++++++++++---
>  tools/build/Makefile.feature                  |  4 +-
>  tools/build/feature/Makefile                  |  4 ++
>  tools/build/feature/test-all.c                |  4 ++
>  .../feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c   | 13 +++++
>  tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h          | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
>  tools/perf/Makefile.config                    |  8 +++
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.c                    |  7 ++-
>  11 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c
>  create mode 100644 tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h
> 
> -- 
> 2.37.0.3.g30cc8d0f14

-- 

- Arnaldo
Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Jiri Olsa 3 years, 8 months ago 
On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 09:45:06AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:38:26PM -0700, Andres Freund escreveu:
> > binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
> > compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
> > binutils commit:
> > https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07
> > 
> > I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
> > Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
> > much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
> > tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
> > looks nicer this way.
> > 
> > I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
> > bit off...
> > 
> > I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?
> 
> I think its ok
>  
> > WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,
> 
> I think its related to libbfd, and it comes from a long time ago, trying
> to find the cset adding that...
> 
> > nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
> > in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...
> > 
> > V2:
> > - split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
> >   separate
> 
> Cool, thanks, I'll process the first 4 patches, then at some point the
> bpftool bits can be merged, alternatively I can process those as well if
> the bpftool maintainers are ok with it.
> 
> I'll just wait a bit to see if Jiri and others have something to say.

looks good

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

thanks,
jirka

> 
> - Arnaldo
> 
> > - included a bit more information about tests I did in commit messages
> > - add a maybe_unused to fprintf_json_styled's style argument
> > 
> > V3:
> > - don't include dis-asm-compat.h when building without libbfd
> >   (Ben Hutchings)
> > - don't include compiler.h in dis-asm-compat.h, use (void) casts instead,
> >   to avoid compiler.h include due to potential licensing conflict
> > - dual-license dis-asm-compat.h, for better compatibility with the rest of
> >   bpftool's code (suggested by Quentin Monnet)
> > - don't display feature-disassembler-init-styled test
> >   (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
> > - don't display feature-disassembler-four-args test, I split this for the
> >   different subsystems, but maybe that's overkill? (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
> > 
> > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
> > CC: Ben Hutchings <benh@debian.org>
> > Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220622181918.ykrs5rsnmx3og4sv@alap3.anarazel.de
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+icZUVpr8ZeOKCj4zMMqbFT013KJz2T1csvXg+VSkdvJH1Ubw@mail.gmail.com
> > 
> > Andres Freund (8):
> >   tools build: Add feature test for init_disassemble_info API changes
> >   tools build: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
> >   tools include: add dis-asm-compat.h to handle version differences
> >   tools perf: Fix compilation error with new binutils
> >   tools bpf_jit_disasm: Fix compilation error with new binutils
> >   tools bpf_jit_disasm: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature
> >     test
> >   tools bpftool: Fix compilation error with new binutils
> >   tools bpftool: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
> > 
> >  tools/bpf/Makefile                            |  7 ++-
> >  tools/bpf/bpf_jit_disasm.c                    |  5 +-
> >  tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile                    |  8 ++-
> >  tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c                | 42 +++++++++++---
> >  tools/build/Makefile.feature                  |  4 +-
> >  tools/build/feature/Makefile                  |  4 ++
> >  tools/build/feature/test-all.c                |  4 ++
> >  .../feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c   | 13 +++++
> >  tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h          | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  tools/perf/Makefile.config                    |  8 +++
> >  tools/perf/util/annotate.c                    |  7 ++-
> >  11 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c
> >  create mode 100644 tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h
> > 
> > -- 
> > 2.37.0.3.g30cc8d0f14
> 
> -- 
> 
> - Arnaldo
Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Quentin Monnet 3 years, 8 months ago 
On 01/08/2022 13:45, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:38:26PM -0700, Andres Freund escreveu:
>> binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
>> compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
>> binutils commit:
>> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07
>>
>> I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
>> Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
>> much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
>> tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
>> looks nicer this way.
>>
>> I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
>> bit off...
>>
>> I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?
> 
> I think its ok
>  
>> WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,
> 
> I think its related to libbfd, and it comes from a long time ago, trying
> to find the cset adding that...
> 
>> nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
>> in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...
>>
>> V2:
>> - split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
>>   separate
> 
> Cool, thanks, I'll process the first 4 patches, then at some point the
> bpftool bits can be merged, alternatively I can process those as well if
> the bpftool maintainers are ok with it.
> 
> I'll just wait a bit to see if Jiri and others have something to say.
> 
> - Arnaldo

Thanks for this work! For the series:

Acked-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>

For what it's worth, it would make sense to me that these patches remain
together (so, through Arnaldo's tree), given that both the perf and
bpftool parts depend on dis-asm-compat.h being available.

Quentin
Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo 3 years, 8 months ago 
Em Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 04:15:19PM +0100, Quentin Monnet escreveu:
> On 01/08/2022 13:45, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:38:26PM -0700, Andres Freund escreveu:
> >> binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
> >> compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
> >> binutils commit:
> >> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07
> >>
> >> I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
> >> Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
> >> much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
> >> tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
> >> looks nicer this way.
> >>
> >> I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
> >> bit off...
> >>
> >> I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?
> > 
> > I think its ok
> >  
> >> WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,
> > 
> > I think its related to libbfd, and it comes from a long time ago, trying
> > to find the cset adding that...
> > 
> >> nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
> >> in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...
> >>
> >> V2:
> >> - split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
> >>   separate
> > 
> > Cool, thanks, I'll process the first 4 patches, then at some point the
> > bpftool bits can be merged, alternatively I can process those as well if
> > the bpftool maintainers are ok with it.
> > 
> > I'll just wait a bit to see if Jiri and others have something to say.
> > 
> > - Arnaldo
> 
> Thanks for this work! For the series:
> 
> Acked-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
> 
> For what it's worth, it would make sense to me that these patches remain
> together (so, through Arnaldo's tree), given that both the perf and
> bpftool parts depend on dis-asm-compat.h being available.

Ok, so I'm tentatively adding it to my local tree to do some tests, if
someone disagrees, please holler.

- Arnaldo
Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Daniel Borkmann 3 years, 8 months ago 
On 8/1/22 8:02 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 04:15:19PM +0100, Quentin Monnet escreveu:
>> On 01/08/2022 13:45, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>> Em Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:38:26PM -0700, Andres Freund escreveu:
>>>> binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
>>>> compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
>>>> binutils commit:
>>>> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07
>>>>
>>>> I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
>>>> Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
>>>> much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
>>>> tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
>>>> looks nicer this way.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
>>>> bit off...
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?
>>>
>>> I think its ok
>>>   
>>>> WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,
>>>
>>> I think its related to libbfd, and it comes from a long time ago, trying
>>> to find the cset adding that...
>>>
>>>> nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
>>>> in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...
>>>>
>>>> V2:
>>>> - split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
>>>>    separate
>>>
>>> Cool, thanks, I'll process the first 4 patches, then at some point the
>>> bpftool bits can be merged, alternatively I can process those as well if
>>> the bpftool maintainers are ok with it.
>>>
>>> I'll just wait a bit to see if Jiri and others have something to say.
>>>
>>> - Arnaldo
>>
>> Thanks for this work! For the series:
>>
>> Acked-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
>>
>> For what it's worth, it would make sense to me that these patches remain
>> together (so, through Arnaldo's tree), given that both the perf and
>> bpftool parts depend on dis-asm-compat.h being available.
> 
> Ok, so I'm tentatively adding it to my local tree to do some tests, if
> someone disagrees, please holler.

Ack, sgtm. Please route these fixes via your tree. Thanks Arnaldo!
Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble_info API changes
Posted by Sedat Dilek 3 years, 8 months ago 
On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 3:38 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>
> binutils changed the signature of init_disassemble_info(), which now causes
> compilation failures for tools/{perf,bpf} on e.g. debian unstable. Relevant
> binutils commit:
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=60a3da00bd5407f07
>
> I first fixed this without introducing the compat header, as suggested by
> Quentin, but I thought the amount of repeated boilerplate was a bit too
> much. So instead I introduced a compat header to wrap the API changes. Even
> tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c, which needs its own callbacks for json, imo
> looks nicer this way.
>
> I'm not regular contributor, so it very well might be my procedures are a
> bit off...
>
> I am not sure I added the right [number of] people to CC?
>
> WRT the feature test: Not sure what the point of the -DPACKAGE='"perf"' is,
> nor why tools/perf/Makefile.config sets some LDFLAGS/CFLAGS that are also
> in feature/Makefile and why -ldl isn't needed in the other places. But...
>
> V2:
> - split patches further, so that tools/bpf and tools/perf part are entirely
>   separate
> - included a bit more information about tests I did in commit messages
> - add a maybe_unused to fprintf_json_styled's style argument
>
> V3:
> - don't include dis-asm-compat.h when building without libbfd
>   (Ben Hutchings)
> - don't include compiler.h in dis-asm-compat.h, use (void) casts instead,
>   to avoid compiler.h include due to potential licensing conflict
> - dual-license dis-asm-compat.h, for better compatibility with the rest of
>   bpftool's code (suggested by Quentin Monnet)
> - don't display feature-disassembler-init-styled test
>   (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
> - don't display feature-disassembler-four-args test, I split this for the
>   different subsystems, but maybe that's overkill? (suggested by Jiri Olsa)
>

Hi Andres,

Just made a quick test & run with some custom patchset and LLVM-15 RC1:

[ REPRODUCER ]

LLVM_MVER="15"

##LLVM_TOOLCHAIN_PATH="/usr/lib/llvm-${LLVM_MVER}/bin"
LLVM_TOOLCHAIN_PATH="/opt/llvm/bin"
if [ -d ${LLVM_TOOLCHAIN_PATH} ]; then
   export PATH="${LLVM_TOOLCHAIN_PATH}:${PATH}"
fi

PYTHON_VER="3.10"
MAKE="make"
MAKE_OPTS="V=1 -j1 HOSTCC=clang-$LLVM_MVER HOSTLD=ld.lld
HOSTAR=llvm-ar CC=clang-$LLVM_MVER LD=ld.lld AR=llvm-ar
STRIP=llvm-strip"

echo "LLVM MVER ........ $LLVM_MVER"
echo "Path settings .... $PATH"
echo "Python version ... $PYTHON_VER"
echo "make line ........ $MAKE $MAKE_OPTS"

LANG=C LC_ALL=C make -C tools/perf clean 2>&1 | tee ../make-log_perf-clean.txt

LANG=C LC_ALL=C $MAKE $MAKE_OPTS -C tools/perf
PYTHON=python${PYTHON_VER} install-bin 2>&1 | tee
../make-log_perf-install_bin_python${PYTHON_VER}_llvm${LLVM_MVER}.txt

Looks good.

$ ~/bin/perf -vv
perf version 5.19.0
                dwarf: [ on  ]  # HAVE_DWARF_SUPPORT
   dwarf_getlocations: [ on  ]  # HAVE_DWARF_GETLOCATIONS_SUPPORT
                glibc: [ on  ]  # HAVE_GLIBC_SUPPORT
        syscall_table: [ on  ]  # HAVE_SYSCALL_TABLE_SUPPORT
               libbfd: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBBFD_SUPPORT
           debuginfod: [ OFF ]  # HAVE_DEBUGINFOD_SUPPORT
               libelf: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBELF_SUPPORT
              libnuma: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBNUMA_SUPPORT
numa_num_possible_cpus: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBNUMA_SUPPORT
              libperl: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBPERL_SUPPORT
            libpython: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBPYTHON_SUPPORT
             libslang: [ on  ]  # HAVE_SLANG_SUPPORT
            libcrypto: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBCRYPTO_SUPPORT
            libunwind: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBUNWIND_SUPPORT
   libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on  ]  # HAVE_DWARF_SUPPORT
                 zlib: [ on  ]  # HAVE_ZLIB_SUPPORT
                 lzma: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LZMA_SUPPORT
            get_cpuid: [ on  ]  # HAVE_AUXTRACE_SUPPORT
                  bpf: [ on  ]  # HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT
                  aio: [ on  ]  # HAVE_AIO_SUPPORT
                 zstd: [ on  ]  # HAVE_ZSTD_SUPPORT
              libpfm4: [ OFF ]  # HAVE_LIBPFM

[ Test on Intel Sandybridge CPU ]

$ echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/kernel/kptr_restrict
/proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid
0

$ ~/bin/perf test 10 93 94 95
10: PMU events                                                      :
10.1: PMU event table sanity                                        : Ok
10.2: PMU event map aliases                                         : Ok
10.3: Parsing of PMU event table metrics                            : Ok
10.4: Parsing of PMU event table metrics with fake PMUs             : Ok
93: perf all metricgroups test                                      : Ok
94: perf all metrics test                                           : Ok
95: perf all PMU test                                               : Ok

Feel free to add my:

Tested-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> # LLVM v15.0.0-rc1 (x86-64)

Regards,
-Sedat-

> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> Cc: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
> Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
> CC: Ben Hutchings <benh@debian.org>
> Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220622181918.ykrs5rsnmx3og4sv@alap3.anarazel.de
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+icZUVpr8ZeOKCj4zMMqbFT013KJz2T1csvXg+VSkdvJH1Ubw@mail.gmail.com
>
> Andres Freund (8):
>   tools build: Add feature test for init_disassemble_info API changes
>   tools build: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
>   tools include: add dis-asm-compat.h to handle version differences
>   tools perf: Fix compilation error with new binutils
>   tools bpf_jit_disasm: Fix compilation error with new binutils
>   tools bpf_jit_disasm: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature
>     test
>   tools bpftool: Fix compilation error with new binutils
>   tools bpftool: Don't display disassembler-four-args feature test
>
>  tools/bpf/Makefile                            |  7 ++-
>  tools/bpf/bpf_jit_disasm.c                    |  5 +-
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile                    |  8 ++-
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c                | 42 +++++++++++---
>  tools/build/Makefile.feature                  |  4 +-
>  tools/build/feature/Makefile                  |  4 ++
>  tools/build/feature/test-all.c                |  4 ++
>  .../feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c   | 13 +++++
>  tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h          | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
>  tools/perf/Makefile.config                    |  8 +++
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.c                    |  7 ++-
>  11 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-disassembler-init-styled.c
>  create mode 100644 tools/include/tools/dis-asm-compat.h
>
> --
> 2.37.0.3.g30cc8d0f14
>

Patchew 2.1-devel-ea86937

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.