Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 7 Nov 2018 11:33:40 +0800
From:   leo.yan@linaro.org
To:     acme@redhat.com, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc:     Coresight ML <coresight@lists.linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question: perf dso support for /proc/kallsyms
Message-ID: <20181107033340.GJ3983@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
References: <20181102025516.GA25374@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181102025516.GA25374@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10+31 (9cdd884) (2018-06-19)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:55:16AM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Now I found that if use the command 'perf script' for Arm CoreSight trace
> data, it fails to parse kernel symbols if we don't specify kernel vmlinux
> file.   So when we don't specify kernel symbol files then perf tool will
> roll back to use /proc/kallsyms for kernel symbols parsing, as result it will
> run into below flow:
> 
>   thread__find_addr_map(thread, cpumode, MAP__FUNCTION, address, &al);
>   map__load(al.map);
>   dso__data_read_offset(al.map->dso, machine, offset, buffer, size);
>     `-> data_read_offset()
> 
> I can observe the function data_read_offset() returns failure, this is caused
> by checking the offset sanity "if (offset > dso->data.file_size)"  (I pasted
> the whole function code at below in case you want to get more context for it),
> but if perf use "/proc/kallsyms" to load kernel symbols, the variable
> 'dso->data.file_size' will be set to zero thus the sanity checking always
> thinks the offset is out of the file size bound.
> 
> Now I still don't understand how the dso/map support "/proc/kallsyms" and
> have no idea to fix this issue, though I spent some time to look into it.
> 
> Could you give some suggestion for this?  Or even better if you have fixing
> for this, I am glad to test at my side.

Hi Jiri, Arnaldo,

Could you give some suggestion for this question?  Thanks!

> static ssize_t data_read_offset(struct dso *dso, struct machine *machine,
>                                 u64 offset, u8 *data, ssize_t size)
> {
>         if (data_file_size(dso, machine))
>                 return -1;
> 
>         /* Check the offset sanity. */
>         if (offset > dso->data.file_size)
>                 return -1;
> 
>         if (offset + size < offset)
>                 return -1;
> 
>         return cached_read(dso, machine, offset, data, size);
> }
> 
> Thanks,
> Leo Yan