Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf symbols: Fix HAVE_LIBBFD_BUILDID_SUPPORT build

["Rémi Bernon" <rbernon@codeweavers.com>]

Hi!

On 9/4/25 10:13, James Clark wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/09/2025 5:07 pm, Ian Rogers wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 8:15 AM James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org> 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> read_build_id() now has a blocking argument, but libbfd uses fopen()
>>> internally which doesn't support O_NONBLOCK. Fix the build by adding the
>>> argument and ignoring it:
>>>
>>>    util/symbol-elf.c:964:8: error: too many arguments to function 
>>> ‘read_build_id’
>>>      964 |  err = read_build_id(filename, bid, block);
>>>
>>> Fixes: 2c369d91d093 ("perf symbol: Add blocking argument to 
>>> filename__read_build_id")
>>> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
>>
>> Libbfd should go away:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250823003216.733941-14-irogers@google.com/
>> but I can imagine that currently this is hit in a build test - sorry
>> for missing that and thanks for the fix!
>>
> 
> Yeah just one of the build tests, I'm not actually using it.
> 
> Remi are you still using this? To be fair the addition for PE support is 
> fairly recent and even includes a binary for testing it so I'm not sure 
> if we should be so quick to remove it.
> 
Yes, I'm still using it occasionally, and I think it's generally useful 
for Wine profiling purposes and I would rather prefer that it's not removed.

I know it's not built by default because of license conflicts. I didn't 
realize that was an issue when contributing the changes, and it is quite 
unfortunate (and silly IMO).

Then I'm not particularly attached to libbfd and any other option that 
would let perf read PE files would be alright, as long as PE support is 
kept.

Cheers,
-- 
Rémi Bernon <rbernon@codeweavers.com>