bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [iovisor-dev] Error loading xdp program that worked with bpf_load
       [not found]           ` <CAEf4BzafLSnjjqdeH9-Wu7J69a=7_3gmqqDBV8ysTOTmnvmtyw@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2020-06-11 16:39             ` Alexei Starovoitov
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2020-06-11 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrii Nakryiko
  Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer, Elerion, iovisor-dev,
	Toke Høiland-Jørgensen, Xdp, Yonghong Song, bpf

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 9:35 AM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 4:00 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
> <brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > (Cross-posting to iovisor-dev)
> >
> > Seeking input from BPF-llvm developers. How come Clang/LLVM 10+ is
> > generating incompatible BTF-info in ELF file, and downgrading to LLVM-9
> > fixes the issue ?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:50:27 -0700 Elerion <elerion1000@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Never mind, I fixed it by downgrading to Clang 9.
> > >
> > > It appears to be an issue with Clang/LLVM 10+
> > >
> > > https://github.com/cilium/ebpf/issues/43
>
> This is newer Clang recording that function is global, not static.
> libbpf is sanitizing BTF to remove this flag, if kernel doesn't
> support this. But given this is re-implementation of libbpf, that's
> probably not happening, right?

just running ./test_xdp_veth.sh on the latest bpf-next with the latest
clang I see:
BTF debug data section '.BTF' rejected: Invalid argument (22)!
 - Length:       514
Verifier analysis:
...
[11] VAR _license type_id=9 linkage=1
[12] DATASEC license size=0 vlen=1 size == 0


BTF debug data section '.BTF' rejected: Invalid argument (22)!
 - Length:       494
Verifier analysis:
...
[11] VAR _license type_id=9 linkage=1
[12] DATASEC license size=0 vlen=1 size == 0


BTF debug data section '.BTF' rejected: Invalid argument (22)!
11] VAR _license type_id=9 linkage=1
[12] DATASEC license size=0 vlen=1 size == 0

PING 10.1.1.33 (10.1.1.33) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.1.1.33: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.042 ms

--- 10.1.1.33 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.042/0.042/0.042/0.000 ms
selftests: xdp_veth [PASS]

Is that just the noise from libbpf probing or what?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2020-06-11 16:40 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <CAMDScmnpbPgs+mB_aMY16aXLMMWBgfu0sqna06MH8RPoGpw7_Q@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <87imfy7hrx.fsf@toke.dk>
     [not found]   ` <CAMDScmm5nCzeffaeEuSFHATunsH36XW2VzbsFCuWhU5OYr_naA@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <87a71a7gay.fsf@toke.dk>
     [not found]       ` <CAMDScmnTYKfjMjiqLGduY4Pk3X0D7RQhjtY7DuPmh65VMNeCRw@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]         ` <20200611125952.3527dfdb@carbon>
     [not found]           ` <CAEf4BzafLSnjjqdeH9-Wu7J69a=7_3gmqqDBV8ysTOTmnvmtyw@mail.gmail.com>
2020-06-11 16:39             ` [iovisor-dev] Error loading xdp program that worked with bpf_load Alexei Starovoitov

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).