Re: pull-request: bpf-next 2023-09-16

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

 



On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 6:40 AM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 6:25 AM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 6:59 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi David, hi Jakub, hi Paolo, hi Eric,
> > >
> > > The following pull-request contains BPF updates for your *net-next* tree.
> > >
> > > We've added 73 non-merge commits during the last 9 day(s) which contain
> > > a total of 79 files changed, 5275 insertions(+), 600 deletions(-).
> > >
> > > The main changes are:
> > >
> > > 1) Basic BTF validation in libbpf, from Andrii Nakryiko.
> > >
> > > 2) bpf_assert(), bpf_throw(), exceptions in bpf progs, from Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi.
> > >
> > > 3) next_thread cleanups, from Oleg Nesterov.
> > >
> > > 4) Add mcpu=v4 support to arm32, from Puranjay Mohan.
> > >
> > > 5) Add support for __percpu pointers in bpf progs, from Yonghong Song.
> > >
> > > 6) Fix bpf tailcall interaction with bpf trampoline, from Leon Hwang.
> > >
> > > 7) Raise irq_work in bpf_mem_alloc while irqs are disabled to improve refill probabablity, from Hou Tao.
> > >
> > > Please consider pulling these changes from:
> > >
> > >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git
> > >
> >
> > This might have been raised already, but bpf on x86 now depends on
> > CONFIG_UNWINDER_ORC ?
> >
> > $ grep CONFIG_UNWINDER_ORC .config
> > # CONFIG_UNWINDER_ORC is not set
> >
> > $ make ...
> > arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c:3022:58: error: no member named 'sp' in
> > 'struct unwind_state'
> >                 if (!addr || !consume_fn(cookie, (u64)addr,
> > (u64)state.sp, (u64)state.bp))
> >                                                                  ~~~~~ ^
> > 1 error generated.
>
> Kumar,
> can probably explain better,
> but no the bpf as whole doesn't depend.
> One feature needs either ORC or frame unwinder.
> It won't work with unwinder_guess.
> The build error is a separate issue.
> It hasn't been reported before.

I see the error with CONFIG_UNWINDER_FRAME_POINTER.
That's unexpected.
Kumar,
looks like this config path wasn't tested.

Eric, Paolo, Dave, Kuba,
please ignore this PR.
We need to fix this first.





[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