On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 1:19 PM Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 10:15 AM Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Okay, thanks for the explanation. I applied the patch set to > > my local env and indeed, with this patch, I can see libbpf returns > > an error. > > How did you repro this? > I've tried reverting this patch, but the test in patch 3 still passes > for me without errors. Took me a long time... I was able to repro with: diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_gotol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_gotol.c index 05a329ee45ee..66bdb940a40b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_gotol.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_gotol.c @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ l3_%=: \ SEC("socket") __description("gotol, large_imm") __success __failure_unpriv __retval(40000) +__log_level(1) __naked void gotol_large_imm(void) and then I finally realized that this patch is fixing the case when test_progs runs with -v. Like: ./test_progs -t gotol -v I wish you mentioned this in the commit log. Would have saved me a ton of time.