On 30/08/2024 23:20, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 1:49 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 08:56:08AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 6:19 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 11:05:30AM +0100, Alan Maguire wrote: >>>>> Arnaldo: apologies but I think we'll either need to back out the >>>>> distilled stuff for 1.28 or have a new libbpf resync that captures the >>>>> fixes for endian issues once they land. Let me know what works best for >>>>> you. Thanks! >>>> >>>> It was useful, we got it tested more widely and caught this one. >>>> >>>> Andrii, what do you think? Can we get a 1.5.1 with this soon so that we >>>> do a resying in pahole and then release 1.28? >>> >>> Did you mean 1.4.6? We haven't released v1.5 just yet. >>> >>> But yes, I'm going to cut a new set of bugfix releases to libbpf >>> anyways, there is one more skeleton-related fix I have to backport. >>> >>> So I'll try to review, land, and backport the fix ASAP. >> >> Well, Alan sent patches updating libbpf to 1.5.0, so I misunderstood, I >> think he meant what is to become 1.5.0, so even better, I think its just >> a matter of updating the submodule sha: >> >> ⬢[acme@toolbox pahole]$ git show b6def578aa4a631f870568e13bfd647312718e7f >> commit b6def578aa4a631f870568e13bfd647312718e7f >> Author: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Mon Jul 29 12:13:16 2024 +0100 >> >> pahole: Sync with libbpf-1.5 >> >> This will pull in BTF support for distilled base BTF. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Cc: dwarves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240729111317.140816-2-alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx >> Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> diff --git a/lib/bpf b/lib/bpf >> index 6597330c45d18538..686f600bca59e107 160000 >> --- a/lib/bpf >> +++ b/lib/bpf >> @@ -1 +1 @@ >> -Subproject commit 6597330c45d185381900037f0130712cd326ae59 >> +Subproject commit 686f600bca59e107af4040d0838ca2b02c14ff50 >> ⬢[acme@toolbox pahole]$ >> >> Right? > > Yes, and I'm doing another Github sync today. > > Separate question, I think pahole supports the shared library version > of libbpf, as an option, is that right? How do you guys handle missing > APIs for distilled BTF in such a case? > Good question - at present the distill-related code is conditionally compiled if LIBBPF_MAJOR_VERSION >=1 and LIBBF_MINOR_VERSION >= 5; so if an older shared library libbpf+headers is used, the btf_feature is simply ignored as if we didn't know about it. See [1] for the relevant code in btf_encoder.c. This problem doesn't arise if we're using the synced libbpf. There might be a better way to handle this, but I think that's enough to ensure we avoid compilation failures at least. [1] https://github.com/acmel/dwarves/blob/fd14dc67cb6aaead553074afb4a1ddad10209892/btf_encoder.c#L1766 >> >> - Arnaldo
