On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 12:11:06PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 06:22:02PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 2:32 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Some distros seem to enable the -fcf-protection=branch by default, > > > which breaks our setup on first instruction of uprobe trigger > > > functions and place there endbr64 instruction. > > > > > > Marking them with nocf_check attribute to skip that. > > > > > > Adding -Wno-attributes for bench objects, becase nocf_check can > > > be used only when -fcf-protection=branch is enabled, otherwise > > > we get a warning and break compilation. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > tools/include/linux/compiler.h | 4 ++++ > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 2 +- > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_trigger.c | 6 +++--- > > > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/include/linux/compiler.h b/tools/include/linux/compiler.h > > > index 7b65566f3e42..14038ce04ca4 100644 > > > --- a/tools/include/linux/compiler.h > > > +++ b/tools/include/linux/compiler.h > > > @@ -58,6 +58,10 @@ > > > #define noinline > > > #endif > > > > > > +#ifndef __nocfcheck > > > +#define __nocfcheck __attribute__((nocf_check)) > > > +#endif > > > > Let's preserve spelling of the attribut, __nocf_check ? > > > > BTW, just FYI, seems like kernel is defining it as: > > > > #define __noendbr __attribute__((nocf_check)) > > > > Thought somewhere deep in x86-specific code, so probably not a good > > idea to use it here? > > ugh, I missed it.. better to use __noendbr nah, I'll keep using __nocf_check, __noendbr is bery arch specific as you said jirka > > > > > > + > > > /* Are two types/vars the same type (ignoring qualifiers)? */ > > > #ifndef __same_type > > > # define __same_type(a, b) __builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof(a), typeof(b)) > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile > > > index e425a946276b..506d3d592093 100644 > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile > > > @@ -726,7 +726,7 @@ $(OUTPUT)/test_cpp: test_cpp.cpp $(OUTPUT)/test_core_extern.skel.h $(BPFOBJ) > > > # Benchmark runner > > > $(OUTPUT)/bench_%.o: benchs/bench_%.c bench.h $(BPFOBJ) > > > $(call msg,CC,,$@) > > > - $(Q)$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -O2 -c $(filter %.c,$^) $(LDLIBS) -o $@ > > > + $(Q)$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -O2 -Wno-attributes -c $(filter %.c,$^) $(LDLIBS) -o $@ > > > > let's better use `#pragma warning disable` in relevant .c files, > > instead of this global flag? > > ok, will try that > > thanks, > jirka
