On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 16:37:50 +0000 SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Jiri, > > On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 18:20:39 +0200 Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 06:11:20PM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote: > > > __register_btf_kfunc_id_set() assumes .BTF to be part of the module's > > > .ko file if CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF is enabled. If that's not the case, > > > the function prints an error message and return an error. As a result, > > > such modules cannot be loaded. > > > > > > However, the section could be stripped out during a build process. It > > > would be better to let the modules loaded, because their basic > > > functionalities have no problem[1], though the BTF functionalities will > > > not be supported. Make the function to lower the level of the message > > > from error to warn, and return no error. > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220219082037.ow2kbq5brktf4f2u@apollo.legion/ > > > > > > Reported-by: Alexander Egorenkov <Alexander.Egorenkov@xxxxxxx> > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/87y228q66f.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > Suggested-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220219082037.ow2kbq5brktf4f2u@apollo.legion/ > > > Fixes: dee872e124e8 ("bpf: Populate kfunc BTF ID sets in struct btf") > > > > should it be this one in Fixes instead? > > c446fdacb10d bpf: fix register_btf_kfunc_id_set for !CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF > > The commit c446fdacb10d was trying to fix commit dee872e124e8, which this patch > is claiming to fix, by relaxing the check. Nevertheless, it seems the check > need to further relaxed, and therefore I wrote this patch. > > For the reason, I was thinking this patch is directly fixing c446fdacb10d, but > is also fixing a problem originally introduced by dee872e124e8. Nevertheless, > as the dee872e124e8 also has the Fixes tag, I think your suggestion makes s/dee872e124e8 also has /c446fdacb10d also has / Sorry if it made anyone be confused. Thanks, SJ [...]
