Re: [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: allow empty module BTFs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 2:28 AM Christopher William Snowhill
<chris@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> When is this being applied to an actual kernel? 5.11 is still quite broken without these two patches. Unless you're not using a vfat EFI partition, I guess.
>

It's in v5.11-rc5.

> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021, at 12:20 PM, patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Hello:
> >
> > This series was applied to bpf/bpf.git (refs/heads/master):
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 23:03:40 -0800 you wrote:
> > > Some modules don't declare any new types and end up with an empty BTF,
> > > containing only valid BTF header and no types or strings sections. This
> > > currently causes BTF validation error. There is nothing wrong with such BTF,
> > > so fix the issue by allowing module BTFs with no types or strings.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Christopher William Snowhill <chris@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Fixes: 36e68442d1af ("bpf: Load and verify kernel module BTFs")
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > Here is the summary with links:
> >   - [bpf,1/2] bpf: allow empty module BTFs
> >     https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/bcc5e6162d66
> >   - [bpf,2/2] libbpf: allow loading empty BTFs
> >     https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/b8d52264df85
> >
> > You are awesome, thank you!
> > --
> > Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
> > https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
> >
> >
> >



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux