Re: [PATCH v2] perf,x86: avoid missing caller address in stack traces captured in uprobe

[Josh Poimboeuf]

On Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 08:35:08PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 6:11 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 05:06:14PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > In general, even with false positives, I think it's overwhelmingly
> > > better to get correct entry stack trace 99.9% of the time, and in the
> > > rest 0.01% cases it's fine having one extra bogus entry (but the rest
> > > should still be correct), which should be easy for humans to recognize
> > > and filter out, if necessary.
> >
> > Agreed, this is a definite improvement overall.
> 
> Cool, I'll incorporate that into v3 and send it soon.
> 
> >
> > BTW, soon there will be support for sframes instead of frame pointers,
> > at which point these checks should only be done for the frame pointer
> > case.
> 
> Nice, this is one of the reasons I've been thinking about asynchronous
> stack trace capture in BPF (see [0] from recent LSF/MM).
>  [0] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1k10-HtK7pP5CMMa86dDCdLW55fHOut4co3Zs5akk0t4

I don't seem to have permission to open it.

> Few questions, while we are at it. Does it mean that
> perf_callchain_user() will support working from sleepable context and
> will wait for data to be paged in? Is anyone already working on this?
> Any pointers?

I had a prototype here:

  https://lkml.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1699487758.git.jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx

Hopefully I can get started on v2 soon.

-- 
Josh