On Sat, 3 Sep 2022 15:11:54 +0200 Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig > index f9920f1341c8..089c20cefd2b 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig > @@ -284,6 +284,7 @@ config X86 > select PROC_PID_ARCH_STATUS if PROC_FS > select HAVE_ARCH_NODE_DEV_GROUP if X86_SGX > imply IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT if EFI > + select HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_NO_PATCHABLE > > config INSTRUCTION_DECODER > def_bool y > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h > index 9c1674973e03..e267625557cb 100644 > --- a/include/linux/bpf.h > +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h > @@ -924,7 +924,14 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_dispatcher(void *image, s64 *funcs, int num_funcs); > }, \ > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 I think Peter may have already mentioned this, but shouldn't he above be: #ifdef HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_NO_PATCHABLE ?? -- Steve > +#define BPF_DISPATCHER_ATTRIBUTES __attribute__((patchable_function_entry(5))) > +#else > +#define BPF_DISPATCHER_ATTRIBUTES > +#endif > + > #define DEFINE_BPF_DISPATCHER(name) \ > + notrace BPF_DISPATCHER_ATTRIBUTES \ > noinline __nocfi unsigned int bpf_dispatcher_##name##_func( \ > const void *ctx, \ > const struct bpf_insn *insnsi, \ > --
