On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 2:43 AM Muhammad Falak R Wani <falakreyaz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 10:11:36PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 4:15 AM Muhammad Falak R Wani > > <falakreyaz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > commit: "be6bfe36db17 block: inline hot paths of blk_account_io_*()" > > > inlines the function `blk_account_io_done`. As a result we can't attach a > > > kprobe to the function anymore. Use `__blk_account_io_done` instead. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Muhammad Falak R Wani <falakreyaz@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > samples/bpf/task_fd_query_kern.c | 2 +- > > > samples/bpf/tracex3_kern.c | 2 +- > > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/samples/bpf/task_fd_query_kern.c b/samples/bpf/task_fd_query_kern.c > > > index c821294e1774..186ac0a79c0a 100644 > > > --- a/samples/bpf/task_fd_query_kern.c > > > +++ b/samples/bpf/task_fd_query_kern.c > > > > samples/bpf/task_fd_query_user.c also needs adjusting, no? Have you > > tried running those samples? > Aplologies, I ran the `tracex3` program, but missed to verify `task_fd_query`. Should I send a V2 > where I modify only the `tracex3` ? No, send a patch fixing everything in one patch
