Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 8:15 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 3:03 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> Wait, what? This is a regression that *breaks people's programs* on >> >> compiler versions that are still very much in the wild! I mean, fine if >> >> you don't want to support new features on such files, but then surely we >> >> can at least revert back to the old behaviour? >> > >> > Those folks that care about compiling with old llvm would have to stick >> > to whatever loader they have instead of using libbpf. >> > It's not a backward compatibility breakage. >> >> What? It's a change in libbpf that breaks loading of existing BPF object >> files that were working (with libbpf) before. If that's not a backward >> compatibility break then that term has lost all meaning. > > The user space library is not a kernel. > The library will change its interface. It will remove functions, features, etc. > That's what .map is for. Right, OK, so how do I use .map to get the old behaviour here? That's all I'm asking for, really... -Toke
