On 7/10/19 11:53 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > BTF size resolution logic isn't always resolving type size correctly, leading > to erroneous map creation failures due to value size mismatch. > > This patch set: > 1. fixes the issue (patch #1); > 2. adds tests for trickier cases (patch #2); > 3. and converts few test cases utilizing BTF-defined maps, that previously > couldn't use typedef'ed arrays due to kernel bug (patch #3). > > Patch #1 can be applied against bpf tree, but selftest ones (#2 and #3) have > to go against bpf-next for now. Why #2 and #3 have to go to bpf-next? bpf tree also accepts tests, AFAIK. Maybe leave for Daniel and Alexei to decide in this particular case. > > Andrii Nakryiko (3): > bpf: fix BTF verifier size resolution logic > selftests/bpf: add trickier size resolution tests > selftests/bpf: use typedef'ed arrays as map values Looks good to me. Except minor comments in patch 1/3, Ack the series. Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> > > kernel/bpf/btf.c | 14 ++- > .../bpf/progs/test_get_stack_rawtp.c | 3 +- > .../bpf/progs/test_stacktrace_build_id.c | 3 +- > .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_stacktrace_map.c | 2 +- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++ > 5 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >
