From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.itxnorge.no (itx-kvm-14.itxnorge.no [91.189.121.228]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1F574AC176; Tue, 22 Sep 2026 20:02:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.189.121.228 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790107364; cv=none; b=tlWQ0FUb7WaFzaPE4YmhDgyIN52U6t/Dswerr4V5zde4HAlCM+t3OMRNridapQTRQkwsRMXgxblirB8gNvcOzKH2hfvGZBl+l6ybB4YrF083gH0FHDuNhDMsH6xAX5DGLLVZ9r8/6kxe1q1tuO0fjVPJoovQQX5chRBQbnw0Sl4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790107364; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kZzIuUZdeJtjUZxs3xOer06DEMom4RwITwG3trbOWvM=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=L8ST9QDr5HI6VXebWUYUGaZ0CJ2vmO8r9uPwbK7w/iIMXpqo1HZY5Qe8SgUeuI4bW5qAh8s4T/ombM2h5prt+mvgXncX9lv1q4Tv0NbR6ecFM7iT4tmCC2b9USs8H612C+iv4FO4VYOs3Ebe+MoxD+j+oBgiXoTEwKGpDH4MJmE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=itx.no; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=itx.no; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=itx.no header.i=@itx.no header.b=O0enwL+c; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.189.121.228 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=itx.no Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=itx.no Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=itx.no header.i=@itx.no header.b="O0enwL+c" Message-ID: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=itx.no; s=mx.itx.no; t=1790107347; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kZzIuUZdeJtjUZxs3xOer06DEMom4RwITwG3trbOWvM=; b=O0enwL+c0Vv/+BdkiN0wZ4PjNopcuZb142YrD1j+YDvic7cn+iGmeALgGInw+8GntH8Vz4 ntSBA11l0KIGldaIGabCSdJjoiCsJH7vbnn1Gt3HG0aESkedPsQLX+DjQnne/bzTl/tZLe sm2M6022473gsE8sQFZZwaJDZ2X1KQs= Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] perf: user stack dump on sparc64 needs an arch hook From: Stian Halseth To: Magnus Lindholm Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Andreas Larsson , "David S. Miller" , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Namhyung Kim , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Ian Rogers , Adrian Hunter , James Clark , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 22:02:26 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20260922135653.1622301-1-stian@itx.no> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ce6TdhinF5bXGGN2lfMu" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 --=-ce6TdhinF5bXGGN2lfMu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Magnus, thanks for the testing and feedback. Almost done with a v2. It has some minor changes based on the AI bot feedback, and my comments to you below. On Tue, 2026-09-22 at 19:04 +0200, Magnus Lindholm wrote: >=20 > Very nice series, thanks for working on this! >=20 > I built and booted the series on a sparc64 box and haven't > noticed any regressions so far. >=20 > I also smoke-tested the new interfaces from 64-bit userspace with a > small standalone C program using perf_event_open() and software > cpu-clock events. The register-only, stack-only, and combined > register/stack tests all passed. The test does not use tools/perf or > request PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN. I haven't tested end-to-end DWARF > unwinding yet. >=20 > I see that you plan to post the userspace changes once the hook is > settled. Could you include the tools/perf support in the next > revision, > or post it as a follow-up or linked companion series? Having that > available, along with a link to the matching elfutils changes, would > make testing easier and let us exercise the intended DWARF unwinding > use case directly. Yes, I originally planned to post tools/perf after I got some feedback on the first patches.=C2=A0Especially since it touches some generic code that I'm not too familiar with, and I half expect that I have to rewrite some of it based on maintainer feedback :-) But since its "just" a RFC patch at this point, I guess I can post the full series to allow end-to-end testing.=C2=A0 I have mainly focused on the first patches, and the rest was done a bit faster as a means to validate the "core" changes. It works (TM). I'm looking through it now, but I probably make a second thorough review of the entire final series, once the I know what changes I need to make. I will publish and link to the elfutils changes as well. >=20 > Also, could you update the sparc entries from TODO to ok in: >=20 > =C2=A0 Documentation/features/perf/perf-regs/arch-support.txt > =C2=A0 Documentation/features/perf/perf-stackdump/arch-support.txt >=20 > Those updates would fit naturally in patch 2 alongside the > HAVE_PERF_REGS and HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP selections. Yes, agree. --=20 Best regards Stian Halseth =E2=80=8B --=-ce6TdhinF5bXGGN2lfMu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQTK1ph9OaYoND1R57zoeAEuJe36VgUCarLe0gAKCRDoeAEuJe36 VrF2AP9wAbZZ670xm9KEuNDWUdcFAEZen5+BsV7bqBE6LmuepAD/djcN0afRxg98 8YMFwB67dCMOAsM9yvxZCdUyP207Qwc= =pRuN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ce6TdhinF5bXGGN2lfMu--