Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:2785:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ia5csp2292732pxb; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:13:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzW/iEMGeAPQgEF9gGpz0TXMNaWlLhjaIwr898zwfNn9cEkPri8ddMrUCJ89tg2zurM2517 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3c11:: with SMTP id h17mr10593344ejg.20.1610374407744; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:13:27 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1610374407; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=osIj2cKYQjf4cFMmePPRrN4unQELWYCk0dmUazpaRQAGKzh2/sJGefI4qXZKthC2Dl gik/fUoqHOTCu+O15LlEVKbm0kb+MwQyHIYyTv3ztYkdmLUF/y5alBiH67xwU8Yb/L5B PBcF7P1lxk+stfNFLFVLML1WZq1ubaIs8Syn0b92cVfH1xOx9k1sJWUHFrYeZ8gtnRbe jJ7LVfYjxkSv/xWsrkSmdST8yB/9U48BaldxH9JACbQWP6sdowp7g5LBLZlD7BcimzLm 2mB3N2UIH4qDKTXnElxVr694vpE6Y/8UZYX8B10L/p74unWdumgpjHZwGUenhzRvIMHS Jr8w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=FULdoqznJpIO6dqpbJveJTcx9CwKQwRy4ZrcXcmlf2o=; b=UI+jupPJkxt9crt/dGqy6ovGkguNa/kB8TOtlV2RZnqbGlXFTMEp4dDo/cZRvvIF9t W0ibxxp4wcvJJfYqZe+EI8qYMFBSYeSqX1jqw0zusCImyY4SHJKLLLeyqOwb3s2UPq+V TafXgFrXwiLO27LQ1qOrzn9Apaeck/8bzK1PkPO1Ew3t8CzpG9IBtqTE9DAbYY8TEFyO Z1UDUm3ubAI/UGVvgUsGLlU8XKFP1j51Y7vSTVuy+pjAJjwRJTaWVHrpgCjnTCZWE7/r XVO6VwuWBh8827WngRNTAhemI2AzkDyJOvmWIJNSPt2P5XTlmVdgH8ajVHlWTvFEkk4m OC2Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id cf6si6753362edb.557.2021.01.11.06.13.02; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:13:27 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388835AbhAKOJp (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 09:09:45 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:58844 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729847AbhAKOJc (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 09:09:32 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 397631042; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:08:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from e107158-lin (e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.78]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1CE673F719; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:08:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:08:42 +0000 From: Qais Yousef To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Phil Auld , Dietmar Eggemann , vincent.donnefort@arm.com, mingo@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, valentin.schneider@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/debug: Add new tracepoint to track cpu_capacity Message-ID: <20210111140842.hwl4qojw3qymzw34@e107158-lin> References: <1598605249-72651-1-git-send-email-vincent.donnefort@arm.com> <20200828102724.wmng7p6je2pkc33n@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <1e806d48-fd54-fd86-5b3a-372d9876f360@arm.com> <20200828172658.dxygk7j672gho4ax@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <58f5d2e8-493b-7ce1-6abd-57705e5ab437@arm.com> <20200902135423.GB93959@lorien.usersys.redhat.com> <20200907110223.gtdgqod2iv2w7xmg@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20200908131954.GA147026@lorien.usersys.redhat.com> <20210104182642.xglderapsfrop6pi@e107158-lin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/11/21 15:04, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 06:26:42PM +0000, Qais Yousef wrote: > > > So I have a proper patch for that now, that actually turned out to be really > > tiny once you untangle exactly what is missing. > > > > Peter, bpf programs aren't considered ABIs AFAIK, do you have concerns about > > that? > > In order to use these you need to rely on BTF to get anything useful > done right? And anything that relies on BTF cannot be ABI. Yes. To decode struct rq for instance one has to either hardcode it in their program or use BTF to get the definition dynamically. The worry is if we modify the function signature of the tracepoint. Alexei did confirm this can't be an ABI and I'm adding additional documentation to make this crystal clear. Thanks -- Qais Yousef