All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tools build: Don't set libunwind as available if test-all.c build succeeds
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 19:36:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z_K7ruz8hhvCTbL8@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z_ArFrHU7hMNUOv3@x1>


* Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote:

> The tools/build/feature/test-all.c file tries to detect the expected,
> most common set of libraries/features we expect to have available to
> build perf with.
> 
> At some point libunwind was deemed not to be part of that set of
> libraries, but the patches making it to be opt-in ended up forgetting
> some details, fix one more.
> 
> Testing it:
> 
>   $ rm -rf /tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/ ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/
>   $ rpm -q libunwind-devel
>   libunwind-devel-1.8.0-3.fc40.x86_64
>   $ make -k LIBUNWIND=1 CORESIGHT=1 O=/tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/ -C tools/perf install-bin |& grep unwind && ldd ~/bin/perf | grep unwind
>   ...                               libunwind: [ on  ]
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/arch/x86/tests/dwarf-unwind.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/arch/x86/util/unwind-libunwind.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/arm64-frame-pointer-unwind-support.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/tests/dwarf-unwind.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/unwind-libunwind-local.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/unwind-libunwind.o
> 	  libunwind-x86_64.so.8 => /lib64/libunwind-x86_64.so.8 (0x00007f615a549000)
> 	  libunwind.so.8 => /lib64/libunwind.so.8 (0x00007f615a52f000)
>   $ sudo rpm -e libunwind-devel
>   $ rm -rf /tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/ ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/
>   $ make -k LIBUNWIND=1 CORESIGHT=1 O=/tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/ -C tools/perf install-bin |& grep unwind && ldd ~/bin/perf | grep unwind
>   Makefile.config:653: No libunwind found. Please install libunwind-dev[el] >= 1.1 and/or set LIBUNWIND_DIR
>   ...                               libunwind: [ OFF ]
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/arch/x86/tests/dwarf-unwind.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/arch/x86/util/unwind-libdw.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/arm64-frame-pointer-unwind-support.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/tests/dwarf-unwind.o
>     CC      /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/unwind-libdw.o
>   $

So I'm not sure whether this is related to my libunwind-OFF build 
message bugreport, but in case it is, with this patch applied I still 
get this message both before and after applying the patch:

...                               libunwind: [ OFF ]

Note: I did not add any LIBUNWIND parameters to the build, it's a 
standard 'make clean install' perf build:

  $ make clean install
  ...
  BUILD:   Doing 'make -j128' parallel build
  ...
  ...                               libunwind: [ OFF ]
  ...

All other feature messages indicate '[ on ]'.

It's on a fairly standard x86-64 Ubuntu 24.10 installation, with 
various development libraries installed. Let me know if you need
any debug output or other information!

Thanks,

	Ingo

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-04-06 17:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-04 18:55 [PATCH 1/1] tools build: Don't set libunwind as available if test-all.c build succeeds Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2025-04-04 20:30 ` Namhyung Kim
2025-04-07 19:48   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2025-04-06 17:36 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Z_K7ruz8hhvCTbL8@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.