From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F111228CA9; Thu, 30 Oct 2025 05:44:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761803097; cv=none; b=BCWDlie9VLfz40fIyIQgOLV7G5hTP1FnxEy7thXriMI5uGztCm1WXKy6GN5SzIvSqgOc3iWuhCnpFyDu3zChEUzchJ/c98M/BcA0T7JhgLayPuxX926QUZ+AJVvUcKwCenv7JraZ+KkgwDjQrSods44j/ypzU8qNMUDm8pRoTfc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761803097; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uo66Dy0uiF0O+hdZ0X1088dBsMEaPVjdELsKtaWghds=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jO/Qm0ZpSilm94+ZBKZFTpUKNWrVoRGWGFDoJI5KN4ZTJS7Se8g62w25fi9o68zy/1VLn4OW2IQBR9M7fmzpPW9sqHnl30cFB3cNvzL0Bdf9Xc1KFB7IfxEaQDpKi1DFbQMPstLIGFxK41T9NIMV31uq8c6C3Dx7QN/nvYpGZOE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=oTinanvm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="oTinanvm" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECC88C4CEF1; Thu, 30 Oct 2025 05:44:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1761803097; bh=uo66Dy0uiF0O+hdZ0X1088dBsMEaPVjdELsKtaWghds=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=oTinanvmdKQeEKjDjTOy++2bJoot2SCmxBRawWsxysLQbRg/k3ZIikeH4+zXurga2 pnOa361ka2FwbyoFKOZla+jPiemosGE1ZNCUcihtwhA5NzGeKVHA6lRbaVSkcf3hIj /CJcsaPC7NG8Xwy4Rt/cv19INZ+DiPGXGiBaqxQ1qvBLcE54IaWNdHfjP4bEihColI ToNMWoAD15Ednnu7DMjgxTHrtRR6MggOGrzJ8tBTG6q9HpozMLqPCWOn0fho6oyp4H vqdZh+9v8FCGvBuDDGqBi2Dvx5a6ScdEm/i883wZzbj6sQE1ndlc/GLPC9wnMBgZ4K rAnVXmKJpqUvQ== Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 22:44:54 -0700 From: Namhyung Kim To: Quentin Monnet Cc: KP Singh , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BUG] bpftool: Build failure due to opensslv.h Message-ID: References: <2cb226f8-a67c-4bdb-8c59-507c99a46bab@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 10:05:52AM +0100, Quentin Monnet wrote: > 2025-10-27 11:27 UTC-0700 ~ Namhyung Kim > > On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 11:41:01AM +0000, Quentin Monnet wrote: > >> 2025-10-26 21:01 UTC-0700 ~ Namhyung Kim > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I'm seeing a build failure like below in Fedora 40 and others. I'm not > >>> sure if it's reported already but it failed to build perf tools due to > >>> errors in the bootstrap bpftool. > >>> > >>> CC /build/util/bpf_skel/.tmp/bootstrap/sign.o > >>> sign.c:16:10: fatal error: openssl/opensslv.h: No such file or directory > >>> 16 | #include > >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >>> compilation terminated. > >>> make[3]: *** [Makefile:256: /build/util/bpf_skel/.tmp/bootstrap/sign.o] Error 1 > >>> make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > >>> make[2]: *** [Makefile.perf:1213: /build/util/bpf_skel/.tmp/bootstrap/bpftool] Error 2 > >>> make[1]: *** [Makefile.perf:289: sub-make] Error 2 > >>> make: *** [Makefile:76: all] Error 2 > >>> > >>> I think it's from the recent signing change. I'm not familiar with > >>> openssl but I guess there's a proper feature check for it. Is this a > >>> known issue? > >> > >> > >> Hi Namhyung, > > > > Hello! > > > >> > >> This looks related to the program signing change indeed, commit > >> 40863f4d6ef2 ("bpftool: Add support for signing BPF programs") > >> introduced a dependency on OpenSSL's development headers for bpftool. > >> It's not gated behind a feature check. On Fedora, I think the headers > >> come with openssl-devel, do you have this package installed? > > > > No I don't, but I guess it should be able to build on such systems. Or > > is it required for bpftool? Anyway I feel like it should have a feature > > check and appropriate error messages. > > > > +Cc KP > > We usually have feature checks when optional features bring in new > dependencies for bpftool, but we haven't discussed it this time. My > understanding was that program signing is important enough that it > should always be present in newer versions of bpftool, making OpenSSL > one of the required dependencies going forward. Yeah, the problem is that it also affects to perf build. > > We don't currently have feature checks to tell when required > dependencies are missing for bpftool (it's just the build failing, in > that case). I know perf does a great job at it, we could look into it > for bpftool, too. It's in the tools/build directory. :) Thanks, Namhyung