From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Ian Rogers" <irogers@google.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@kernel.org>,
"Namhyung Kim" <namhyung@kernel.org>,
"Quentin Monnet" <qmo@kernel.org>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
"Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
"Nicolas Schier" <nsc@kernel.org>,
"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
"Bill Wendling" <morbo@google.com>,
"Justin Stitt" <justinstitt@google.com>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, gary@garyguo.net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 3/3] bpftool: Prefer zlib-rs over zlib when available
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 17:06:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-189716@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029162958.3224280-4-irogers@google.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] bpftool: link failure with pre-built libbpf.a when zlib-rs is used
--
commit 7a2cb794e37f624ded57767492091a08919fa52c
Author: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
bpftool: Prefer zlib-rs over zlib when available
This commit updates the bpftool Makefile to detect and prefer zlib-rs over
C zlib, configuring ZLIB_CFLAGS and ZLIB_LIBS via feature_rust_lib and
falling back to -lz when zlib-rs is unavailable or when cross-compiling
bootstrap bpftool.
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile b/tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile
> index b0f7168e79432..a193cf89a0346 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/Makefile
[ ... ]
> @@ -38,7 +41,9 @@ $(LIBBPF_OUTPUT) $(BOOTSTRAP_OUTPUT) $(LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP_OUTPUT) $(LIBBPF_HDRS_DI
>
> $(LIBBPF): $(wildcard $(BPF_DIR)/*.[ch] $(BPF_DIR)/Makefile) | $(LIBBPF_OUTPUT)
> $(Q)$(MAKE) -C $(BPF_DIR) OUTPUT=$(LIBBPF_OUTPUT) \
> - DESTDIR=$(LIBBPF_DESTDIR:/=) prefix= $(LIBBPF) install_headers
> + DESTDIR=$(LIBBPF_DESTDIR:/=) prefix= \
> + $(if $(ZLIB_CFLAGS),EXTRA_CFLAGS="$(or $(EXTRA_CFLAGS),-g -O2) $(ZLIB_CFLAGS)") \
> + $(LIBBPF) install_headers
[ ... ]
> @@ -153,8 +178,27 @@ include $(FEATURES_DUMP)
> endif
> endif
>
> -LIBS = $(LIBBPF) -lelf $(CRYPTO_LIBS) -lz
> -LIBS_BOOTSTRAP = $(LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP) -lelf $(CRYPTO_LIBS) -lz
> +# Prefer zlib-rs over C zlib when detected. When cross-compiling, the host
> +# bootstrap bpftool still links against the host's -lz.
> +ifeq ($(feature-zlib-rs),1)
> + $(call feature_rust_lib,zlib-rs)
> + ZLIB_CFLAGS := $(FEATURE_CFLAGS-zlib-rs)
> + ZLIB_LIBS := $(FEATURE_LIBS-zlib-rs)
> + CFLAGS += $(ZLIB_CFLAGS)
> + ifeq ($(CROSS_COMPILE),)
> + HOST_CFLAGS += $(ZLIB_CFLAGS)
> + LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP_CFLAGS += $(ZLIB_CFLAGS)
> + ZLIB_BOOTSTRAP_LIBS := $(ZLIB_LIBS)
> + else
> + ZLIB_BOOTSTRAP_LIBS := -lz
> + endif
> +else
> + ZLIB_LIBS := -lz
> + ZLIB_BOOTSTRAP_LIBS := -lz
> +endif
> +
> +LIBS = $(LIBBPF) -lelf $(CRYPTO_LIBS) $(ZLIB_LIBS)
> +LIBS_BOOTSTRAP = $(LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP) -lelf $(CRYPTO_LIBS) $(ZLIB_BOOTSTRAP_LIBS)
[Severity: Medium]
Can this cause a link failure with an undefined reference to gzopen64 when
bpftool is built using a pre-built libbpf.a on a host where zlib-rs is
detected?
In tools/lib/bpf/Makefile, libbpf is compiled with:
override CFLAGS += -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
When tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c is compiled without ZLIB_CFLAGS, bpf_object__read_kconfig_file()
includes the system zlib.h with those macros defined, which remaps gzopen()
to gzopen64() and leaves an undefined reference to gzopen64 in libbpf.a.
In contrast, libz-rs-sys only exports gzopen and not gzopen64, which is why
the $(LIBBPF) and $(LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP) rules here pass $(ZLIB_CFLAGS) so that
libbpf uses the bundled zlib.h from libz-rs-sys.
However, several Makefiles build libbpf.a directly via tools/lib/bpf/Makefile
without ZLIB_CFLAGS and then pass that pre-built archive directory to
bpftool via LIBBPF_OUTPUT or LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP_OUTPUT, such as
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile:
$(DEFAULT_BPFTOOL): $(wildcard $(BPFTOOLDIR)/*.[ch] $(BPFTOOLDIR)/Makefile) \
$(HOST_BPFOBJ) | $(HOST_BUILD_DIR)/bpftool
$(Q)$(MAKE) $(submake_extras) -C $(BPFTOOLDIR) \
ARCH= CROSS_COMPILE= CC="$(HOSTCC)" LD="$(HOSTLD)" \
EXTRA_CFLAGS='-g $(OPT_FLAGS) $(SAN_CFLAGS) $(EXTRA_CFLAGS)' \
EXTRA_LDFLAGS='$(SAN_LDFLAGS) $(EXTRA_LDFLAGS)' \
OUTPUT=$(HOST_BUILD_DIR)/bpftool/ \
LIBBPF_OUTPUT=$(HOST_BUILD_DIR)/libbpf/
Similar patterns exist in tools/sched_ext/Makefile,
tools/testing/selftests/sched_ext/Makefile,
tools/testing/selftests/hid/Makefile, and drivers/hid/bpf/progs/Makefile.
Because $(LIBBPF) or $(LIBBPF_BOOTSTRAP) already exists and is up to date when
bpftool's Makefile runs, the $(LIBBPF) recipe with $(ZLIB_CFLAGS) is skipped,
while LIBS and LIBS_BOOTSTRAP replace -lz with $(ZLIB_LIBS) (libz_rs.a).
Wouldn't linking bpftool then fail with an unresolved gzopen64 symbol from the
pre-built libbpf.a?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261029162958.3224280-1-irogers@google.com?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-29 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 16:29 [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] tools: Add Rust library build infrastructure and prefer zlib-rs Ian Rogers
2026-10-29 16:29 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] tools build: Add Rust library build infrastructure and zlib-rs feature test Ian Rogers
2026-10-29 16:57 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-29 16:29 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] perf build: Prefer zlib-rs over zlib when available Ian Rogers
2026-10-29 16:50 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-29 16:29 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/3] bpftool: " Ian Rogers
2026-10-29 17:06 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-30 0:14 ` Quentin Monnet
2026-10-30 3:11 ` Ian Rogers
2026-10-29 17:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] tools: Add Rust library build infrastructure and prefer zlib-rs Miguel Ojeda
2026-10-29 18:23 ` Ian Rogers
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-189716@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gary@garyguo.net \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nsc@kernel.org \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qmo@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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