On 11/15/2017 06:55 AM, Anmol Panda wrote: > On 14.11.2017 17:41, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 11/14/2017 07:57 AM, Anmol Panda wrote: >>> On 14.11.2017 12:07, David Miller wrote: >>>> From: Anmol Panda <anmol07.visitor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 12:03:23 +0530 >>>> >>>>> No bpf syscall, kernel headers too old? >>>> >>>> Please enable CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL in your kernel config. >>> >>> Hello David, >>> >>> Thank you for your response. We have downloaded the latest stable version of the Linux kernel (4.13.12) and we compiled it with these flags enabled as per the directions here: http://cilium.readthedocs.io/en/stable/bpf/ ; . >>> >>> CONFIG_CGROUP_BPF=y >>> CONFIG_BPF=y >>> CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL=y >>> CONFIG_NET_SCH_INGRESS=m >>> CONFIG_NET_CLS_BPF=m >>> CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT=y >>> CONFIG_BPF_JIT=y >>> CONFIG_LWTUNNEL_BPF=y >>> CONFIG_HAVE_EBPF_JIT=y >>> CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS=y >>> CONFIG_TEST_BPF=m >>> >>> We also enabled bpf_jit_enable and after the new kernel installation, we verified the setup using the ./test_verifier script int eh tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ folder and the all 506 tests were passed. When we tried the xdp1 program in the sample/tests/ we got the error: >>> >>> No bpf syscall, kernel headers too old? >>> >>> Is there anything we are missing here? Please guide us. >> >> Yes, please make sure that you have a reasonably recent iproute2, if not, >> just compile it from the git master branch from: >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shemminger/iproute2.git/ >> >> You kernel headers installed on your machine seem too old, that is why >> __NR_bpf is not defined and the iproute2 loader throws this error message >> on bpf syscall. >> >> Two options: >> >> 1) Install recent kernel headers, for example in your kernel source tree, >> run: make headers_install INSTALL_HDR_PATH=/usr/ >> >> or >> >> 2) Apply the iproute2 patch with fallback definitions for the syscall >> number manually: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/776015/ and then >> compile iproute2 again (patch is not in upstream iproute2). >> >> Hope that helps, >> Daniel > > Hello Daniel, > Thank you for your response. We have completed both the above steps. We aren't getting the sys_call error but now it reports the following issues with the xdp1 program from /samples/bpf/. > > ./xdp1 -N 6 > bpf_load_program() err=1 > > > On checking with 'ip link list', we get the following output indicating the program was jited to the device. > ' > 6: p1p1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 xdp qdisc mq state UP mode DEFAULT group default qlen 1000 > link/ether a0:36:9f:42:9d:54 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > prog/xdp id 14 tag 5c65c4da7b254d8a jited > ' Okay, so the XDP program got loaded just fine. > On running the tc_redirect_l2 script, we found this message (its an error/warning we receive on several programs, including some of the p4c-xdp examples). The output after running the tc_redirect_l2 script.sh is > > ' > ./tc_l2_redirect.sh > > l2_to_ipip ingress: Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > OK > l2_to_ipip egress: Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > OK > l2_to_ip6tnl ingress: Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > ' That note is harmless and not an issue at all - it just means that the obj file was compiled with an older struct bpf_elf_map and loader fixed it up; maybe I should just remove it to be potentially less confusing. > On running the xdp11.o file from p4c/extensions/p4c-xdp/tests/ we get: > ' > ip link set dev p1p1 xdp obj xdp11.o > > Note: 8 bytes struct bpf_elf_map fixup performed due to size mismatch! > RTNETLINK answers: Device or resource busy > ' See `man ip-link`. It's replaced as: ip -force link set dev p1p1 xdp obj xdp11.o > We have two error here. The first one being the bpf_load_program() and the other being the bpf_elf_map_fixup issue. Lastly, the device is reported to be busy although the programs are jited successfully to the device (in this case p1p1). Please guide us. > > Thank you, > Sincerely, > > > >
|