Hi all, On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:54:05 +0200 Daniel Borkmann wrote: > > On 04/07/2015 06:18 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On 4/7/15 4:13 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > >> [ Cc'ing Dave, fyi ] > >> > >> On 04/07/2015 11:05 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:56:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann > >>> wrote: > >>>> On 04/07/2015 10:48 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >>>>> * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > >>>>>> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> kernel/events/core.c: In function 'perf_event_set_bpf_prog': > >>>>>> kernel/events/core.c:6732:15: error: 'struct bpf_prog_aux' has no > >>>>>> member named 'prog_type' > >>>>>> if (prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) { > >>>>>> ^ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Caused by commit 2541517c32be ("tracing, perf: Implement BPF programs > >>>>>> attached to kprobes"). > >>>>> > >>>>> Note, this must be some (rarely triggered) aspect of the ppc64 > >>>>> defconfig that neither x86 randconfigs nor most other arch defconfigs > >>>>> expose? > >>>> > >>>> Note, this is a merge conflict with the work that went via net-next > >>>> tree, > >>>> i.e. 24701ecea76b ("ebpf: move read-only fields to bpf_prog and shrink > >>>> bpf_prog_aux"). I believe that is why it didn't trigger on tip tree. > >>>> > >>>> You should be able to resolve it in linux-next by changing the test to: > >>>> > >>>> if (prog->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) { > >>> > >>> Thanks Daniel, I will do that tomorrow. Someone will have to remember > >>> to tell Linus. > >> > >> Yes, indeed, depending which tree is merged first. > > > > Daniel analysis is correct, but the fix for kernel/events/core.c > > should be: > > - if (prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) { > > + if (prog->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) { > > instead of 'prog->prog_type' > > Yes, absolutely, thanks! So I have applied that as a merge fix patch. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au