[PATCH 0/6] Re: glibc: Add SFrame support for stack backtracing

[Indu]

On 2025-07-16 1:17 a.m., Sam James wrote:
> Claudiu Zissulescu-Ianculescu <claudiu.zissulescu-ianculescu@oracle.com> writes:
> 
>> On 7/16/25 10:44 AM, Sam James wrote:
>>> Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 16 2025, Sam James wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that's going to be feasible here. We'd need to quickly
>>>>> have suitable probes that have little risk of false positives. There's a
>>>>> bunch of issues that aren't fixed in 2.44.
>>>>
>>>> Given that anything produced by binutils < 2.45 is unusable, and 2.45
>>>> hasn't even been released yet, we should mark the support as
>>>> experimental and certainly should not enable it by default.
>>>
>>> I think that would be okay. I don't think we really need it enabled by
>>> default yet for the purposes of any enablement or debugging work we're
>>> doing.
>>
>> I can respin my pending config patch to accept sframe option only
>> starting with binutils 2.45, disable the default 'on' for x86_64 and
>> AArch64, and (probably) adding missing bits in backtracer to work with
>> SFrame 2.5
> 
> +1. Up to you if you want to wait for Indu or not, but this seems like
> the best plan to me.

The plan sounds good to me.