On Wed, 2025-08-27 at 20:28 +0100, Alan Maguire wrote: [...] > I'm working on a small 2-patch series at the moment to improve this. The > problem is we currently have no way to associate the DWARF with the > relevant ELF function; DWARF representations of functions do not have > "." suffixes either so we are just matching by name prefix when we > collect DWARF info about a particular function. Oh, I see, there is no way to associate DWARF info with either 'bpf_strnchr' or 'bpf_strnchr.constprop.0' w/o checking address. Thank you. > The series I'm working on uses DWARF addresses to improve the DWARF/ELF > association, ensuring that we don't toss functions that look > inconsistent but just have .part or .cold suffixed components that have > non-matching DWARF function signatures. ".constprop" isn't covered yet > however. Is ".constprop" special, or just has to be allowed as one of the prefixes? [...]
