From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Michael Petlan <mpetlan@redhat.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf tools: Add more weak libbpf functions
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 09:39:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YYuFOD7dy3MOA1/s@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP-5=fVS2AwZ9bP4BjF9GDcZqmw5fwUZ6OGXdgMnFj3w_2OTaw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 10:49:53AM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 6:07 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > We hit the window where perf uses libbpf functions, that did not
> > make it to the official libbpf release yet and it's breaking perf
> > build with dynamicly linked libbpf.
> >
> > Fixing this by providing the new interface as weak functions which
> > calls the original libbpf functions. Fortunatelly the changes were
> > just renames.
>
> Could we just provide these functions behind a libbpf version #if ?
> Weak symbols break things in subtle ways, under certain circumstances
> the weak symbol is preferred over the strong due to lazy object file
> resolution:
> https://maskray.me/blog/2021-06-20-symbol-processing#archive-processing
> This bit me last week, but in general you get away with it as the lazy
> object file will get processed in an archive exposing the strong
> symbol. With an #if you either get a linker error for 2 definitions or
> 0 definitions, and it's clear what is broken.
hum, I see 2 problems..
usinf #if works nicely for btf__raw_data because it's used directly,
but bpf_object__next_program and bpf_object__next_map are used
through macros:
#define bpf_object__for_each_map(pos, obj) \
for ((pos) = bpf_object__next_map((obj), NULL); \
(pos) != NULL; \
(pos) = bpf_object__next_map((obj), (pos)))
#define bpf_object__for_each_program(pos, obj) \
for ((pos) = bpf_object__next_program((obj), NULL); \
(pos) != NULL; \
(pos) = bpf_object__next_program((obj), (pos)))
we would need to provide 'old version' macro as well
another issue is more disturbing.. compiling with LIBBPF_DYNAMIC=1
still seems to take the in-kernel bpf headers, because we use
-I$(KTREE)/tools/lib
so any include with '<bpf/...> will pick up the kernel version
and not the one in /usr/include, perhaps the order of '-I...'
could help, I need to check
jirka
>
> In the past we had problems due to constant propagation from weak
> const variables, where #if was the solution:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191001003623.255186-1-irogers@google.com/
>
> There was some recent conversation on libbpf version for pahole here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAP-5=fUc3LtU0WYg-Py9Jf+9picaWHJdSw=sdOMA54uY3p1pdw@mail.gmail.com/T/
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211021183330.460681-1-irogers@google.com/
>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c
> > index 4d3b4cdce176..ceb96360fd12 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c
> > @@ -33,6 +33,33 @@ struct btf * __weak btf__load_from_kernel_by_id(__u32 id)
> > return err ? ERR_PTR(err) : btf;
> > }
> >
> > +struct bpf_program * __weak
> > +bpf_object__next_program(const struct bpf_object *obj, struct bpf_program *prev)
> > +{
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic push
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdeprecated-declarations"
> > + return bpf_program__next(prev, obj);
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
> > +}
> > +
> > +struct bpf_map * __weak
> > +bpf_object__next_map(const struct bpf_object *obj, const struct bpf_map *prev)
> > +{
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic push
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdeprecated-declarations"
> > + return bpf_map__next(prev, obj);
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
> > +}
> > +
> > +const void * __weak
> > +btf__raw_data(const struct btf *btf_ro, __u32 *size)
> > +{
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic push
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdeprecated-declarations"
> > + return btf__get_raw_data(btf_ro, size);
> > +#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
> > +}
> > +
> > static int snprintf_hex(char *buf, size_t size, unsigned char *data, size_t len)
> > {
> > int ret = 0;
> > --
> > 2.31.1
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-10 8:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-09 14:07 [PATCH 0/2] perf tools: Fix perf build with dynamic libbpf Jiri Olsa
2021-11-09 14:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf tools: Add more weak libbpf functions Jiri Olsa
2021-11-09 18:49 ` Ian Rogers
2021-11-09 23:33 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-11-10 8:45 ` Jiri Olsa
2021-11-10 22:37 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-11-11 7:14 ` Jiri Olsa
2021-11-10 8:39 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2021-11-13 13:40 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-11-09 14:07 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf tools: Add weak variants for the deprecated " Jiri Olsa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YYuFOD7dy3MOA1/s@krava \
--to=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpetlan@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).