On 1/4/24 2:33 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
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
Sorry for replying later. Just taking a nap...
I reproduced the issue when I tried to find out
why unpriv failed with cpuv4 as I cannot remember why.
IIRC, I am using is
./test_progs-cpuv4 -v -t gotol
I wish you mentioned this in the commit log.
Would have saved me a ton of time.
