From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Mark Korenberg" <socketpair@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpftool: Make the LLVM disassembler an optional runtime dependency
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 12:54:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-189325@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029-bpftool-plugin-v2-2-1a47b2391b0b@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] bpftool: llvm_plugin_find() misses staged plugins and prefers system plugin
--
commit aa662f293876360fc9cf9139e86022f88a5bbb64
Author: Mark Korenberg <socketpair@gmail.com>
bpftool: Make the LLVM disassembler an optional runtime dependency
This commit moves the libLLVM-based JIT disassembler into an optional
shared library plugin (bpftool-llvm.so) loaded on demand via dlopen()
when disassembling JITed programs or checking feature availability.
Link: https://github.com/libbpf/bpftool/issues/262
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c
> index 5ff144ce84a1c..2691252a115b9 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/jit_disasm.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -45,7 +45,105 @@ static int oper_count;
[ ... ]
> +/*
> + * Look for the plugin in its install directory, then next to the bpftool
> + * binary so that bpftool also works from its build directory. Do not look
> + * in the current directory: bpftool usually runs as root, and would then
> + * load any library planted in the directory it is run from.
> + */
> +static int llvm_plugin_find(char *path, size_t size)
> +{
> + char exe[PATH_MAX];
> + ssize_t len;
> + char *dir;
> + int n;
> +
> + snprintf(path, size, "%s/%s", LLVM_PLUGIN_DIR, LLVM_PLUGIN_NAME);
> + if (!access(path, F_OK))
> + return 0;
> +
> + len = readlink("/proc/self/exe", exe, sizeof(exe) - 1);
> + if (len < 0)
> + return -1;
> + exe[len] = '\0';
> + dir = strrchr(exe, '/');
> + if (!dir)
> + return -1;
> + *dir = '\0';
> +
> + n = snprintf(path, size, "%s/%s", exe, LLVM_PLUGIN_NAME);
> + if (n < 0 || (size_t)n >= size)
> + return -1;
> + return access(path, F_OK);
> +}
[Severity: Medium]
Can llvm_plugin_find() fail to locate bpftool-llvm.so when bpftool is
installed into a staging directory via DESTDIR, such as in the BPF
selftests build?
In tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile, $(DEFAULT_BPFTOOL) and
$(CROSS_BPFTOOL) are built and staged with:
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile:
$(Q)$(MAKE) $(submake_extras) -C $(BPFTOOLDIR) \
...
OUTPUT=$(HOST_BUILD_DIR)/bpftool/ \
...
prefix= DESTDIR=$(HOST_SCRATCH_DIR)/ install-bin
Because prefix= is empty and libdir is not overridden, tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile
sets libdir to /lib and compiles jit_disasm.o with:
tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile:
prefix ?= /usr/local
libdir ?= $(prefix)/lib
...
CFLAGS += -DLLVM_PLUGIN_DIR='"$(libdir)/bpftool"'
Meanwhile, the install-bin target places the binary and plugin in separate
directories under $(DESTDIR):
tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile:
install-bin: $(OUTPUT)bpftool $(LLVM_PLUGIN)
$(call QUIET_INSTALL, bpftool)
$(Q)$(INSTALL) -m 0755 -d $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/sbin
$(Q)$(INSTALL) $(OUTPUT)bpftool $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/sbin/bpftool
ifneq ($(LLVM_PLUGIN),)
$(call QUIET_INSTALL, bpftool-llvm.so)
$(Q)$(INSTALL) -m 0755 -D -t $(DESTDIR)$(libdir)/bpftool $(LLVM_PLUGIN)
endif
This installs bpftool to $(HOST_SCRATCH_DIR)/sbin/bpftool and the plugin to
$(HOST_SCRATCH_DIR)/lib/bpftool/bpftool-llvm.so. When the staged bpftool
runs, llvm_plugin_find() checks /lib/bpftool/bpftool-llvm.so and
$(HOST_SCRATCH_DIR)/sbin/bpftool-llvm.so, missing the staged plugin in
$(HOST_SCRATCH_DIR)/lib/bpftool/bpftool-llvm.so (causing "bpftool prog dump
jited" to fail and "bpftool version" to omit the llvm feature).
Additionally, because llvm_plugin_find() checks LLVM_PLUGIN_DIR before the
directory of /proc/self/exe, wouldn't running an uninstalled ./bpftool from
its build directory on a host where $(LLVM_PLUGIN_DIR)/bpftool-llvm.so is
already installed load the system plugin instead of ./bpftool-llvm.so next
to the binary (and fail without falling back if the installed plugin has a
different BPFTOOL_LLVM_ABI_VERSION or incompatible sanitizer flags)?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261029-bpftool-plugin-v2-0-1a47b2391b0b@gmail.com?part=2
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-29 12:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 12:43 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpftool: Make the LLVM disassembler an optional runtime dependency Mark Korenberg via B4 Relay
2026-10-29 12:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpftool: Fix disposal of the LLVM disassembler context Mark Korenberg via B4 Relay
2026-10-29 12:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpftool: Make the LLVM disassembler an optional runtime dependency Mark Korenberg via B4 Relay
2026-10-29 12:54 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
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=sashiko-outbox-189325@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=socketpair@gmail.com \
/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