On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 10:19:25AM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 10:12:39PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 12:07:39PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 3:26 PM Jiri Olsa olsajiri@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 09:35:34AM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:04:05PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 12:57:34PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 07:12:05AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 10:15:04AM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 07:54:48AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 06:52:52PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > > hi, > > > > > sending fix for buildid parsing that affects only stable trees > > > > > after merging upstream fix [1]. > > > > > > > > > > Upstream then factored out the whole buildid parsing code, so it > > > > > does not have the problem. > > > > > > > > Why not just take those patches instead? > > > > > > I guess we could, but I thought it's too big for stable > > > > > > we'd need following 2 changes to fix the issue: > > > de3ec364c3c3 lib/buildid: add single folio-based file reader abstraction > > > 60c845b4896b lib/buildid: take into account e_phoff when fetching program headers > > > > > > and there's also few other follow ups: > > > 5ac9b4e935df lib/buildid: Handle memfd_secret() files in build_id_parse() > > > cdbb44f9a74f lib/buildid: don't limit .note.gnu.build-id to the first page in ELF > > > ad41251c290d lib/buildid: implement sleepable build_id_parse() API > > > 45b8fc309654 lib/buildid: rename build_id_parse() into build_id_parse_nofault() > > > 4e9d360c4cdf lib/buildid: remove single-page limit for PHDR search > > > > > > which I guess are not strictly needed > > > > Can you verify what exact ones are needed here? We'll be glad to take > > them if you can verify that they work properly. > > ok, will check
Hello,
I noticed that the BUILD-ID field in vmcoreinfo is broken on stable/longterm kernels and found this thread. Can we please get this fixed soon?
I tried cherry-picking the patches mentioned above ("lib/buildid: add single folio-based file reader abstraction" and "lib/buildid: take into account e_phoff when fetching program headers"), but they don't apply cleanly before 6.11, and they'd need to be reworked for 5.15, which was before folios were introduced. Jiri's minimal fix works for me and seems like a much safer option.
hi, thanks for testing
I think for 6.11 we could go with backport of: de3ec364c3c3 lib/buildid: add single folio-based file reader abstraction 60c845b4896b lib/buildid: take into account e_phoff when fetching program headers
and with the small fix for the rest
but I still need to figure out why also 60c845b4896b is needed to fix the issue on 6.11.. hopefully today
ok, so the fix the issue in 6.11 with upstream backports we'd need both:
de3ec364c3c3 lib/buildid: add single folio-based file reader abstraction
60c845b4896b lib/buildid: take into account e_phoff when fetching program headers
is needed because 1) seems to omit ehdr->e_phoff addition (patch below)
which is added back in 2)
IMO 6.11 is close to upstream and by taking above upstream fixes it will be easier to backport other possible fixes in the future, for other trees I'd take the original one line fix I posted
I still maintain that very minimal is the way to go instead of risking bringing new potential regressions by partially backporting folio rework patchset.
Jiri, there is no point in risking this, best to fix this quickly and minimally. If we ever need to backport further fixes, *then* we can think about folio-based implementation backport.
ok, make sense, the original plan works for me as well
jirka
Greg, could you please queue up Jiri's one line fixes for 5.15, 6.1, 6.6, and 6.11?
Ok, will do, but hopefully you all will help out if there's any problems with the change going forward...
greg k-h