From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F893C433DF for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 00:05:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A362207D3 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 00:05:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="QApUvtXG" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727014AbgHYAFj (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:05:39 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39038 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726698AbgHYAFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:05:36 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x642.google.com (mail-ej1-x642.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::642]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 021B2C0613ED for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 17:05:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x642.google.com with SMTP id dp2so8874061ejc.4 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 17:05:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qSJ3hn6SwlvnIDydC8UlMXM4TqY2oPyCDRxRi3ibWKE=; b=QApUvtXGB19mVLe2YJN+0fc/ADwHcSDUAddvOk2oAlHGx94SRMwAiMJTJvczmY5/LJ 5H8+z7s7ZKd4wBvGD40WowzmVgvVsHC7ykBwWbntxs+LCdWQ0VlGq5aJy0tz0qdKFdin uqbcvQg3gw5dEsFtO/tv+zUPbf76fN0Xd+WIdO2tZWQV+cPBuKHwpaS0iqoIazyjb0WC 0VZo8VziYEC6cUStvp9KOD1OLo0QqjVFLoqT/QcWYj/HyXpaO7wUMO/DhvkzYkOkf+Q8 50J2vA7dD1LC81Uhbyha05eeIKaAFh7rlFdSCBn2tV5rFA3cEm13F4JrxvRfM0oeesYi BmQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qSJ3hn6SwlvnIDydC8UlMXM4TqY2oPyCDRxRi3ibWKE=; b=H4k4frlKzvwx/BME5Rn9R/gHMzvGRz2zttCUhHoGZZ4AzeG+yIEEqzDxNZ2vm/I2G8 V7e/v8ZARLXilGaNlMqSiNHW2iGgjNOuV7PR5/s5XUV5/LyvUo6AAPuK257zzP4XZs6n +6vlk0YRt3WAINN2wykp1FMECbnC912pqKxj48PaXdE+5ymNhOTle8FfJjTL1Vs17jI/ 6PbzwrgZTlDkaOBY4ArHNuIVn4AAB0wOz7CWTC3CAx9h3Qbvr+KlYE5lJkatRxXckdc7 crFk2kSQVKfswDnWhM19pVnLUHQU2A7IlLN4+Rpug7pEf7pKcxyH3ANozWtHVcdqq3b2 ivBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5308lrc7LxZRAvi1qCjAEhZW2LksC0Vx9NOoTzqwI4EHxCOHRxVl Ytmg/1BjY0pLcCwOcUyzm+TKVb3E5jYDAugLB8syOw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwq7yY0fgxViANrAk7HQzEo+kQDYpeeuJOcuEDl5RbeTE9wZIRWTSGvgD/2fC4+y7BPhunkS6W3JpETlvNIrSg= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a085:: with SMTP id q5mr7825181ejy.136.1598313933985; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 17:05:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200819224030.1615203-1-haoluo@google.com> <20200819224030.1615203-2-haoluo@google.com> <35519fec-754c-0a17-4f01-9d6e39a8a7e8@fb.com> In-Reply-To: <35519fec-754c-0a17-4f01-9d6e39a8a7e8@fb.com> From: Hao Luo Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 17:05:22 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/8] bpf: Introduce pseudo_btf_id To: Yonghong Song Cc: Networking , bpf , open list , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , Daniel Borkmann , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Quentin Monnet , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Andrey Ignatov , Jakub Sitnicki Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: bpf-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org Yonghong, An update on this thread. I successfully reproduced this issue on a 8.2.0 gcc compiler, It looks like gcc 4.9 did not have this issue. I was also using clang which did not show this bug. It seems having a DW_AT_specification that refers to another DW_TAG_variable isn't handled in pahole. I have a (maybe hacky) pahole patch as fix and let me clean it up and post for review soon. Hao