Ngomhla ka-Mso, Mas 10, 2025 ngo-22:28 Quentin Monnet <qmo@xxxxxxxxxx> wabhala: > > 2025-03-10 14:25 UTC+0900 ~ nswon <swnam0729@xxxxxxxxx> > > missing error code in do_loader() > > bpf_object__open_file() failed, but return 0 > > This means the command's exit status code was successful, so make sure to return the correct error code. > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/d3b5b4b4-19bb-4619-b4dd-86c958c4a367@stanley.mountain/t/#u > > Closes: https://github.com/libbpf/bpftool/issues/156 > > Signed-off-by: nswon <swnam0729@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Thanks for this! > > Others may correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you should sign off with > your full name here (although it doesn't strictly have to be a full > name, the patch submission docs mention in should be a "known identity" > so I'm not sure whether a GitHub handle, for example, is acceptable). > > > > --- > > tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c > > index e71be67f1d86..641802e308f4 100644 > > --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c > > +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c > > @@ -1928,6 +1928,7 @@ static int do_loader(int argc, char **argv) > > > > obj = bpf_object__open_file(file, &open_opts); > > if (!obj) { > > + err = libbpf_get_error(obj); > > > This is the correct way to retrieve the error code, but given that > bpftool does nothing with this error code, could we instead simply > return -1 to remain consistent with the other locations where we call > bpf_object__open_file() in the tool, please? > > Thanks, > Quentin Thanks for the review! I'll submit a v2 patch soon with the signature renamed :)
