On 11/6/23 10:29 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
Martin reported that there is a libbpf complaining of non-zero-value tail
padding with LIBBPF_OPTS_RESET macro if struct bpf_netkit_opts is modified
to have a 4-byte tail padding. This only happens to clang compiler.
The commend line is: ./test_progs -t tc_netkit_multi_links
Martin and I did some investigation and found this indeed the case and
the following are the investigation details.
Clang 18:
clang version 18.0.0
<I tried clang15/16/17 and they all have similar results>
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_common.h:
#define LIBBPF_OPTS_RESET(NAME, ...) \
do { \
memset(&NAME, 0, sizeof(NAME)); \
NAME = (typeof(NAME)) { \
.sz = sizeof(NAME), \
__VA_ARGS__ \
}; \
} while (0)
#endif
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h:
struct bpf_netkit_opts {
/* size of this struct, for forward/backward compatibility */
size_t sz;
__u32 flags;
__u32 relative_fd;
__u32 relative_id;
__u64 expected_revision;
size_t :0;
};
#define bpf_netkit_opts__last_field expected_revision
In the above struct bpf_netkit_opts, there is no tail padding.
prog_tests/tc_netkit.c:
static void serial_test_tc_netkit_multi_links_target(int mode, int target)
{
...
LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_netkit_opts, optl);
...
LIBBPF_OPTS_RESET(optl,
.flags = BPF_F_BEFORE,
.relative_fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.tc1),
);
...
}
Let us make the following source change, note that we have a 4-byte
tailing padding now.
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
index 6cd9c501624f..0dd83910ae9a 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
@@ -803,13 +803,13 @@ bpf_program__attach_tcx(const struct bpf_program *prog, int ifindex,
struct bpf_netkit_opts {
/* size of this struct, for forward/backward compatibility */
size_t sz;
- __u32 flags;
__u32 relative_fd;
__u32 relative_id;
__u64 expected_revision;
+ __u32 flags;
size_t :0;
};
-#define bpf_netkit_opts__last_field expected_revision
+#define bpf_netkit_opts__last_field flags
The bpf_netkit_ops is in the bpf tree. If avoiding a hole in bpf_netkit_opts
like above is preferred, probably the fix in this patch and the bpf_netkit_ops
change should be in the same libbpf version?
Ran the test in a loop. It resolved the issue.
Tested-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxxx>
