From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from www62.your-server.de (www62.your-server.de [213.133.104.62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40rRWn6lclzF0xF for ; Wed, 23 May 2018 19:08:37 +1000 (AEST) Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/10] tools: bpftool: add delimiters to multi-function JITed dumps To: Jakub Kicinski , Sandipan Das Cc: ast@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Quentin Monnet References: <88b61b11ebca5b44bad0c34225b6f2383e5983a5.1527008647.git.sandipan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180522125544.541c68c8@cakuba> From: Daniel Borkmann Message-ID: <2dabfa7f-15b8-236c-7724-33bc3da7e549@iogearbox.net> Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 11:08:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180522125544.541c68c8@cakuba> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 05/22/2018 09:55 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2018 22:46:13 +0530, Sandipan Das wrote: >> + if (info.nr_jited_func_lens && info.jited_func_lens) { >> + struct kernel_sym *sym = NULL; >> + unsigned char *img = buf; >> + __u64 *ksyms = NULL; >> + __u32 *lens; >> + __u32 i; >> + >> + if (info.nr_jited_ksyms) { >> + kernel_syms_load(&dd); >> + ksyms = (__u64 *) info.jited_ksyms; >> + } >> + >> + lens = (__u32 *) info.jited_func_lens; >> + for (i = 0; i < info.nr_jited_func_lens; i++) { >> + if (ksyms) { >> + sym = kernel_syms_search(&dd, ksyms[i]); >> + if (sym) >> + printf("%s:\n", sym->name); >> + else >> + printf("%016llx:\n", ksyms[i]); >> + } >> + >> + disasm_print_insn(img, lens[i], opcodes, name); >> + img += lens[i]; >> + printf("\n"); >> + } >> + } else { > > The output doesn't seem to be JSON-compatible :( We try to make sure > all bpftool command can produce valid JSON when run with -j (or -p) > switch. > > Would it be possible to make each function a separate JSON object with > "name" and "insn" array? Would that work? Sandipan, could you take a look at this? Given there's json output today we should definitely try not to break it; presumably this would be one final respin of your series with this fixed. Thanks, Daniel