>> In any case, as you've pointed out, duplicates can arise from names in code
>> that is not intended to be a module.
>> Therefore, relying solely on the module name would not fully address the
>> problem you initially aimed to solve.
> From my POV:
> The source path and the line number is enough to distinguish duplicate
> symbols even in modules.
> The added module name would just add extra complexity into the kernel
> and tools parsing and using the alias. The tracing tools would need to
> handle the source path and line number anyway for symbols duplicated
> within same module/vmlinux.
> Adding module name for builtin modules might be misleading. It won't
> be clear which symbols are in vmlinux binary and which are in
> real modules.


-- Daniel

Reply via email to