On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 6/22/19 6:27 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > On 06/21, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >> )
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 9:11 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On 06/21, kernel test robot wrote:
> >>>> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
> >>>>
> >>>> commit: 69d96519dbf0bfa1868dc8597d4b9b2cdeb009d7 ("selftests/bpf: convert socket_cookie test to sk storage")
> >>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> >>>>
> >>>> in testcase: kernel_selftests
> >>>> with following parameters:
> >>>>
> >>>> group: kselftests-00
> >>>>
> >>>> test-description: The kernel contains a set of "self tests" under the tools/testing/selftests/ directory. These are intended to be small unit tests to exercise individual code paths in the kernel.
> >>>> test-url: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/kselftest.txt
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> on test machine: qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu SandyBridge -smp 2 -m 4G
> >>>>
> >>>> caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace):
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
> >>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> # selftests: bpf: test_socket_cookie
> >>>> # libbpf: failed to create map (name: 'socket_cookies'): Invalid
> >>>> # argument
> >>> Another case of old clang trying to create a map that depends on BTF?
> >>> Should we maybe switch those BTF checks in the kernel to return
> >>> EOPNOTSUPP to make it easy to diagnose?
> >> For older compilers that don't generate DATASEC/VAR, you'll see a clear message:
> >>
> >> libbpf: DATASEC '.maps' not found.
> >>
> >> So this must be something else. I just confirmed with clang version
> >> 7.0.20180201 that for ./test_socket_cookie that's the first line
> >> that's emitted on failure.
> > Thanks for checking, I also took a look at the attached kernel_selftests.xz,
> > here is what it has:
> > 2019-06-21 11:58:35 ln -sf /usr/bin/clang-6.0 /usr/bin/clang
> > 2019-06-21 11:58:35 ln -sf /usr/bin/llc-6.0 /usr/bin/llc
> > ...
> > # BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): SKIP. No ELF .BTF found
> > # BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_nokv.o): SKIP. No ELF .BTF found
> > ...
> > # Test case #0 (btf_dump_test_case_syntax): test_btf_dump_case:71:FAIL
> > # failed to load test BTF: -2
> > # Test case #1 (btf_dump_test_case_ordering): test_btf_dump_case:71:FAIL
> > # failed to load test BTF: -2
> > ...
> >
> > And so on. So there is clearly an old clang that doesn't emit any
> > BTF. And I also don't see your recent abd29c931459 before 69d96519dbf0 in
> > linux-next, that's why it doesn't complain about missing/corrupt BTF.
Ah, ok, that would explain it. But in any case, clang 6&7 is too old.
Clang 8 or better yet clang 9 (for global data, datasec/var-dependent
stuff) would be great.
> >
> > We need to convince lkp people to upgrade clang, otherwise, I suppose,
> > we'll get more of these reportings after your recent df0b77925982 :-(
>
> Thanks for the clarification, we'll upgrade clang asap.
Thanks Rong!
>
> Best Regards,
> Rong Chen
>
>
> >
> >>>> # libbpf: failed to load object './socket_cookie_prog.o'
> >>>> # (test_socket_cookie.c:149: errno: Invalid argument) Failed to load
> >>>> # ./socket_cookie_prog.o
> >>>> # FAILED
> >>>> not ok 15 selftests: bpf: test_socket_cookie
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> To reproduce:
> >>>>
> >>>> # build kernel
> >>>> cd linux
> >>>> cp config-5.2.0-rc2-00598-g69d9651 .config
> >>>> make HOSTCC=gcc-7 CC=gcc-7 ARCH=x86_64 olddefconfig
> >>>> make HOSTCC=gcc-7 CC=gcc-7 ARCH=x86_64 prepare
> >>>> make HOSTCC=gcc-7 CC=gcc-7 ARCH=x86_64 modules_prepare
> >>>> make HOSTCC=gcc-7 CC=gcc-7 ARCH=x86_64 SHELL=/bin/bash
> >>>> make HOSTCC=gcc-7 CC=gcc-7 ARCH=x86_64 bzImage
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git
> >>>> cd lkp-tests
> >>>> bin/lkp qemu -k <bzImage> job-script # job-script is attached in this email
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Rong Chen
> >>>>
> >> <mega snip>
