From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755983AbcG0NF7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:05:59 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:43504 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751214AbcG0NF6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:05:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:05:53 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Christian Borntraeger , anton@samba.org, Song Shan Gong , jolsa@kernel.org, dsahern@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/perf: fix 'start' address of module's map Message-ID: <20160727130553.GC5200@kernel.org> References: <1469070651-6447-1-git-send-email-gongss@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1469070651-6447-2-git-send-email-gongss@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160726195039.GA5200@kernel.org> <5797C49A.1070402@de.ibm.com> <20160726202926.GB5200@kernel.org> <87shuvv3g5.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87shuvv3g5.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2 (2016-07-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 07:24:26PM +1000, Michael Ellerman escreveu: > Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo writes: > > Em Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:14:18PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger escreveu: > >> On 07/26/2016 09:50 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >> > So I could as well use what is in /sys/module/tun/sections/.text instead > >> > of reading it from /proc/modules and, in s390, reading it from > >> > /sys/module/tun/sections/.text. > >> > Do you see any problem with using this approach for _all_ arches? > >> I think it should work well for _all_ arches but it will probably be > >> hard to test this without help. > > Well, we could check for the cases we don't know, i.e. read from both > > and warn about cases where it is different, except for s390 where we now > > which is the right one to pick. > >> I wouldn't be surprised if other architectures than s390 actually have > >> the same issue, so doing this for everybody might atually fix this somewhere > >> else. > > Would be nice to get info from other arch people, Michael, how this goes > > on ppc? > It doesn't look like this is a problem on powerpc - at least I haven't > heard of it. > Looking at a system I have here, for all modules (26) the value in > /proc/modules matches the .text section in /sys. > So I think using /sys should be fine for us. Thanks for checking. - Arnaldo