在 2025/2/21 09:11, Eduard Zingerman 写道:
On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 17:07 -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 2:51 PM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 13:21 +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
[...]
I tried the test enumerating all kfuncs in BTF and doing
libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc for BPF_PROG_TYPE_{KPROBE,XDP}.
(Source code at the end of the email).
The set of kfuncs returned for XDP looks correct.
The set of kfuncs returned for KPROBE contains a few incorrect entries:
- bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_hash
- bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_timestamp
- bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_vlan_tag
This is because of a different string reported by verifier for these
three functions.
Ideally, I'd write some script looking for
register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_***, kfunc_set)
calls in the kernel source code and extracting the prog type /
functions in the set, and comparing results of this script with
output of the test below for all program types.
But up to you if you'd like to do such rigorous verification or not.
Otherwise patch-set looks good to me, for all patch-set:
Reviewed-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx>
Shouldn't we fix the issue with those bpf_xdp_metadata_* kfuncs? Do
I assume Tao would post a v8 with the fix.
Sure, will fix it.
you have details on what different string verifier reports?
The string is "metadata kfuncs require device-bound program\n".
[...]
--
Best Regards
Tao Chen
