Use __weak __hidden for bpf_usdt_xxx() APIs instead of much more
confusing `static inline __noinline`. This was previously impossible due
to libbpf erroring out on CO-RE relocations pointing to eliminated weak
subprogs. Now that previous patch fixed this issue, switch back to
__weak __hidden as it's a more direct way of specifying the desired
behavior.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
index 881a2422a8ef..4181fddb3687 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int __bpf_usdt_spec_id(struct pt_regs *ctx)
}
/* Return number of USDT arguments defined for currently traced USDT. */
-static inline __noinline
+__weak __hidden
int bpf_usdt_arg_cnt(struct pt_regs *ctx)
{
struct __bpf_usdt_spec *spec;
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg_cnt(struct pt_regs *ctx)
* Returns 0 on success; negative error, otherwise.
* On error *res is guaranteed to be set to zero.
*/
-static inline __noinline
+__weak __hidden
int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
{
struct __bpf_usdt_spec *spec;
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
* utilizing BPF cookies internally, so user can't use BPF cookie directly
* for USDT programs and has to use bpf_usdt_cookie() API instead.
*/
-static inline __noinline
+__weak __hidden
long bpf_usdt_cookie(struct pt_regs *ctx)
{
struct __bpf_usdt_spec *spec;
--
2.30.2
