-- Andrii
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:50 PM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/07, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > As part of libbpf in 5e61f2707029 ("libbpf: stop enforcing kern_version,
> > > populate it for users") non-LIBBPF_API __bpf_object__open_xattr() API
> > > was removed from libbpf.h header. This broke bpftool, which relied on
> > > that function. This patch fixes the build by switching to newly added
> > > bpf_object__open_file() which provides the same capabilities, but is
> > > official and future-proof API.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 5e61f2707029 ("libbpf: stop enforcing kern_version, populate it for users")
> > > Reported-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > tools/bpf/bpftool/main.c | 4 ++--
> > > tools/bpf/bpftool/main.h | 2 +-
> > > tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
> > > 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > >
[...]
> > > --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> > > +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> > > @@ -1092,9 +1092,7 @@ static int do_run(int argc, char **argv)
> > > static int load_with_options(int argc, char **argv, bool first_prog_only)
> > > {
> > > struct bpf_object_load_attr load_attr = { 0 };
> > > - struct bpf_object_open_attr open_attr = {
> > > - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC,
> > > - };
> > > + enum bpf_prog_type prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC;
> > > enum bpf_attach_type expected_attach_type;
> > > struct map_replace *map_replace = NULL;
[...]
> > >
> > > bpf_object__for_each_program(pos, obj) {
> > > - enum bpf_prog_type prog_type = open_attr.prog_type;
> > > + enum bpf_prog_type prog_type = prog_type;
> > Are you sure it works that way?
>
> Oh, I did this pretty mechanically, didn't notice I'm shadowing. In
> either case I'd like to avoid shadowing, so I'll rename one of them,
> good catch!
>
> >
> > $ cat tmp.c
> > #include <stdio.h>
> >
> > int main()
> > {
> > int x = 1;
> > printf("outer x=%d\n", x);
> >
> > {
> > int x = x;
It's amazing `int x = x;` is compiled successfully when there is no x
in outer scope. And it's also amazing that it's doing the wrong thing
when there is a shadowed variable in outer scope. I can't imagine the
case where this will be a meaningful behavior...
> > printf("inner x=%d\n", x);
> > }
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > $ gcc tmp.c && ./a.out
> > outer x=1
> > inner x=0
> >
> > Other than that:
> > Reviewed-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > >
> > > - if (open_attr.prog_type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC) {
> > > + if (prog_type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_UNSPEC) {
> > > const char *sec_name = bpf_program__title(pos, false);
> > >
> > > err = libbpf_prog_type_by_name(sec_name, &prog_type,
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1
> > >
