On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 8:14 AM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 4:00 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > +
> > +SEC("raw_tracepoint/sys_enter")
> > +int test_core_enum64val(void *ctx)
> > +{
> > +#if __has_builtin(__builtin_preserve_enum_value)
> > + struct core_reloc_enum64val_output *out = (void *)&data.out;
> > + enum named_unsigned_enum64 named_unsigned = 0;
> > + enum named_signed_enum64 named_signed = 0;
>
> libbpf: prog 'test_core_enum64val': relo #0: unexpected insn #0
> (LDIMM64) value: got 8589934591, exp 18446744073709551615 ->
> 18446744073709551615
> libbpf: prog 'test_core_enum64val': relo #0: failed to patch insn #0: -22
> libbpf: failed to perform CO-RE relocations: -22
> libbpf: failed to load object 'test_core_reloc_enum64val.o'
>
> Is it failing in CI because clang is too old?
Hm... doesn't seem so. I pulled Yonghong's patches locally, built the
very latest Clang, rebuilt selftests from scratch and I get the same
error.
Yonghong, do you get the same error in your setup? If not, what am I
missing in mine?
> CI will pick up newer clang sooner or later,
> but the users will be confused.
> The patch 17/18 that updates README certainly helps,
> but I was wondering whether we can do a similar trick
> to what Andrii did in libbpf and make the error more human readable?
