Re: WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 92168, 117897 - using 92168

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

 



On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 3:12 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 08:05:17AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 22:07:57 +0200 Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > > Yeah, it's there on linux-next, too.
> > > >
> > > > Let me grab a fresh VM and try there. Maybe it's my system. Somehow.
> > >
> > > ok, I will look around what's the way to install that centos 8 thing
> >
> > Any luck?
>
> now BTFIDS warnings..
>
> I can see following on centos8 with gcc 8.5:
>
>           BTFIDS  vmlinux
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'task_struct': 300, 56614 - using 300
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'file': 540, 56649 - using 540
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'vm_area_struct': 549, 56652 - using 549
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'seq_file': 953, 56690 - using 953
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'inode': 1132, 56966 - using 1132
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'path': 1164, 56995 - using 1164
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'task_struct': 300, 61905 - using 300
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'file': 540, 61943 - using 540
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'vm_area_struct': 549, 61946 - using 549
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'inode': 1132, 62029 - using 1132
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'path': 1164, 62058 - using 1164
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'cgroup': 1190, 62067 - using 1190
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'seq_file': 953, 62253 - using 953
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'sock': 7960, 62374 - using 7960
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'sk_buff': 1876, 62485 - using 1876
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'bpf_prog': 6094, 62542 - using 6094
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'socket': 7993, 62545 - using 7993
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'xdp_buff': 6191, 62836 - using 6191
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'sock_common': 8164, 63152 - using 8164
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'request_sock': 17296, 63204 - using 17296
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'inet_request_sock': 36292, 63222 - using 36292
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'inet_sock': 32700, 63225 - using 32700
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'inet_connection_sock': 33944, 63240 - using 33944
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'tcp_request_sock': 36299, 63260 - using 36299
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'tcp_sock': 33969, 63264 - using 33969
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'bpf_map': 6623, 63343 - using 6623
>
> I'll need to check on that..
>
> and I just actually saw the 'nf_conn' warning on linux-next/master with
> latest fedora/gcc-12:
>
>           BTF [M] net/netfilter/nf_nat.ko
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 106518, 120156 - using 106518
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 106518, 121853 - using 106518
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 106518, 123126 - using 106518
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 106518, 124537 - using 106518
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 106518, 126442 - using 106518
>         WARN: multiple IDs found for 'nf_conn': 106518, 128256 - using 106518
>           LD [M]  net/netfilter/nf_nat_tftp.ko
>
> looks like maybe dedup missed this struct for some reason
>
> nf_conn dump from module:
>
>         [120155] PTR '(anon)' type_id=120156
>         [120156] STRUCT 'nf_conn' size=320 vlen=14
>                 'ct_general' type_id=105882 bits_offset=0
>                 'lock' type_id=180 bits_offset=64
>                 'timeout' type_id=113 bits_offset=640
>                 'zone' type_id=106520 bits_offset=672
>                 'tuplehash' type_id=106533 bits_offset=704
>                 'status' type_id=1 bits_offset=1600
>                 'ct_net' type_id=3215 bits_offset=1664
>                 'nat_bysource' type_id=139 bits_offset=1728
>                 '__nfct_init_offset' type_id=949 bits_offset=1856
>                 'master' type_id=120155 bits_offset=1856
>                 'mark' type_id=106351 bits_offset=1920
>                 'secmark' type_id=106351 bits_offset=1952
>                 'ext' type_id=106536 bits_offset=1984
>                 'proto' type_id=106532 bits_offset=2048
>
> nf_conn dump from vmlinux:
>
>         [106517] PTR '(anon)' type_id=106518
>         [106518] STRUCT 'nf_conn' size=320 vlen=14
>                 'ct_general' type_id=105882 bits_offset=0
>                 'lock' type_id=180 bits_offset=64
>                 'timeout' type_id=113 bits_offset=640
>                 'zone' type_id=106520 bits_offset=672
>                 'tuplehash' type_id=106533 bits_offset=704
>                 'status' type_id=1 bits_offset=1600
>                 'ct_net' type_id=3215 bits_offset=1664
>                 'nat_bysource' type_id=139 bits_offset=1728
>                 '__nfct_init_offset' type_id=949 bits_offset=1856
>                 'master' type_id=106517 bits_offset=1856
>                 'mark' type_id=106351 bits_offset=1920
>                 'secmark' type_id=106351 bits_offset=1952
>                 'ext' type_id=106536 bits_offset=1984
>                 'proto' type_id=106532 bits_offset=2048
>
> look identical.. Andrii, any idea?

I'm pretty sure they are not identical. There is somewhere a STRUCT vs
FWD difference. We had a similar discussion recently with Alan
Maguire.

>                 'master' type_id=120155 bits_offset=1856

vs

>                 'master' type_id=106517 bits_offset=1856

we'd need to unwind all these references to find where they start to differ

>
> thanks,
> jirka



[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