Subject: Re: [bug#42227] BPF in linux-libre

From: Mathieu Othacehe <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:04:47 +0200

Hey,

> That seems ok. I did find a few questions about debugfs on old irc logs
> and mailing lists.  My only concern again is that I would prefer to opt
> in to such a thing.  debugfs is much simpler than the bpf kernel flags
> though, so maybe it will be ok to remove in the future.

Yeah, but I saw that Ubuntu for instance is enabling it by default, so I
guess it could help to have the same behaviour in Guix System. Added it
with: 6bb07e91e1ab9367f636a3a5e9d52a9e0772aa89.

> But I cannot see anything guix does differently that would cause it to
> fail. My only feeling is perhaps our configure flags for binutils might
> be causing the issue.
>
> As is, however, bpftrace does work even with out HAVE_BFD_DISASM and I
> even used it to debug a few processes recently.

Gave it another try and I think if we could get "binutils" to produce a
dynamic version of libbfd.a, that would make the trick. Anyway, let's
proceed without BFD support for now. Pushed bpftrace as
c55acb073248392b1387017378f36a1d378fa7c4.

Closing the serie, thank you!

Mathieu