On Mon, 2023-03-13 at 16:37 +0000, Alan Maguire wrote:
[...]
> sure; try adding "--skip_encoding_btf_inconsistent_proto --btf_gen_optimized".
> I was testing with gcc 11.2.1.
pahole -F dwarf \
--flat_arrays \
--sort --jobs \
--suppress_aligned_attribute \
--suppress_force_paddings \
--suppress_packed \
--lang_exclude rust \
--show_private_classes \
--skip_encoding_btf_inconsistent_proto \
--btf_gen_optimized \
./vmlinux
Like this, right?
gcc 11.3, pahole master, still don't see this in function prototypes,
maybe I have a simpler kernel config...
[...]
> > On the other hand, I see it in a few structure definitions, e.g. here
> > is original C code (include/linux/sysrq.h:32):
> >
> > struct sysrq_key_op {
> > void (* const handler)(int);
> > const char * const help_msg;
> > const char * const action_msg;
> > const int enable_mask;
> > };
> >
> > And here is how it is reconstructed from DWARF (same happens when
> > reconstructed from BTF):
> >
> > struct sysrq_key_op {
> > const void (*handler)(int); /* 0 8 */
> > const const char * help_msg; /* 8 8 */
> > const const char * action_msg; /* 16 8 */
> > const int enable_mask; /* 24 4 */
> >
> > /* size: 32, cachelines: 1, members: 4 */
> > /* padding: 4 */
> > /* last cacheline: 32 bytes */
> > };
> >
> > So it seems to be a general issue with modifiers printing.
> >
>
> So it seems like the modifier ordering isn't preserved, even though
> the final BTF representation looks right? Thanks!
Yes, BTF looks right, bpftool prints the structure correctly.
[...]
