It's not just about installing different versions of linux-tools. libbfd
has no guarantee of a stable ABI/API, which makes it problematic for
external packages to link against them. Thus it is against policy to
link against libbfd in Ubuntu, and we simply cannot link perf against it
as long as this is the situation.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1894407
Title:
linux-tools: can perf be linked against libbfd, maybe statically?
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Won't Fix
Bug description:
The perf tool has an optional dependency on libbfd. Per Debian policy,
and due to some situation involving parallel installations of this
library, no packages should link dynamically against libbfd. In the
past, bugs have been filed to link perf statically against libbfd in
bug 783660 (from 2011) and then to just not link against it at all in
bug 1748922 (from 2018) and bug 1828234 (from 2019). The argument was
made that perf does not need this dependency, as perf can use
libiberty as an alternative to demangle C++ names.
However, that is not the only thing perf is using libbfd for: the
other is to implement an inlined version of addr2line. This was part
of an important patchset from 2013 that strove to improve the
performance of perf. In my case, I ran my program for all of 30
seconds, generating a 163M large trace, and have been waiting almost
an hour for the events to process... and it is only a third of the way
done; what I see it doing is spawning, over and over and over again,
addr2line, which it wouldn't do if linked against libbfd.
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/413455/
Is it possible to link perf statically against libbfd, in order to let
it use the in-process implementation of addr2line? That is the
solution that I've understood for other packages, such as oprofile in
bug 426614 and bug 588033. Doing a quick grep of the code of perf for
HAVE_LIBBFD_SUPPORT, it seems like bpf disassembly support is also
dependent on libbfd (and so while it is great that Ubuntu's build of
perf has been compiled against libbpf, it seems like that
functionality is being hampered by the lack of linking libbfd).
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1894407/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
