On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 6:38 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I don't remember if this is intention or not, but the main part is > adjusting CO-RE relocation, the actual instruction value is less > important. But this is happening after static linking, because BTF is > deduplicated (there is a duplication in BTF generated by Clang). Ah I see! And the deduplication is done by libbpf during linking? So far, we've been validating that the instruction immediate matches what is in ext_infos. Should I just stop doing that? > There are at least two identical prototypes (which is strange and > might be worth looking into from Clang side). That would be good!
