public inbox for dwarves@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Alexis Lothoré" <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>
To: "Ihor Solodrai" <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>, <dwarves@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, "Alan Maguire" <alan.maguire@oracle.com>,
	"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@kernel.org>,
	"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@fb.com>,
	"Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	"Bastien Curutchet" <bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com>,
	<ebpf@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] btf_encoder: skip functions consuming packed structs passed by value on stack
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2025 23:10:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DB3KUSI90IPO.1AR35OTXH2Y8M@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a9a3cc94-7ce2-4993-96ab-500f250e6e25@linux.dev>

On Fri Jul 4, 2025 at 9:59 PM CEST, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> On 7/4/25 2:01 AM, Alexis Lothoré wrote:
>> Hello Ihor,
>> 
>> thanks for the prompt feedback and testing !
>> 
>> On Thu Jul 3, 2025 at 8:17 PM CEST, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
>>> On 7/3/25 2:02 AM, Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation) wrote:
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>>>>    		/* do not exclude functions with optimized-out parameters; they
>>>>    		 * may still be _called_ with the right parameter values, they
>>>>    		 * just do not _use_ them.  Only exclude functions with
>>>> -		 * unexpected register use or multiple inconsistent prototypes.
>>>> +		 * unexpected register use, multiple inconsistent prototypes or
>>>> +		 * uncertain parameters location
>>>>    		 */
>>>> -		add_to_btf |= !state->unexpected_reg && !state->inconsistent_proto;
>>>> +		add_to_btf |= !state->unexpected_reg && !state->inconsistent_proto && !state->uncertain_parm_loc;
>>>
>>>
>>> Is it possible for a function to have uncertain_parm_loc in one CU,
>>> but not in another?
>>>
>>> If yes, we still don't want the function in BTF, right?
>> 
>> TBH, my understanding about those discrepancies between CUs about the same
>> functions and how pahole handle them is still a bit fragile. Have you got
>> any example about how it could be the case ?
>
> I would hope stuff like this doesn't happen often in the real
> world, but in principle you could have the following situation:
>
> #ifdef ENABLE_PACKING
> struct some_data {
>      char header;
>      int payload;
>      short footer;
> } __attribute__((packed));
> #else
> struct some_data {
>      char header;
>      int payload;
>      short footer;
> };
> #endif
>
> void read_data(/* lots of args */, struct some_data data) { ... }
>
> And then one user has #define ENABLE_PACKING and the other doesn't,
> for example:
>
> #define ENABLE_PACKING // or not
> #include "some_data.h"
>
> void user() {
>       struct some_data = get_some_data();
>       ...
>       read_data(/* args */, some_data);
> }
>
> And then you compile a binary with both users:
>
> $ gcc -g -O0 user1.c user2.c
>
> DWARF will contain both packed and not packed instances of struct
> some_data and two corresponding read_data() funcs.

Got it, thanks for the clarification !

  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-04 21:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-03  9:02 [PATCH v2 0/3] btf_encoder: do not encode functions consuming packed structs on stack Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2025-07-03  9:02 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] btf_encoder: skip functions consuming packed structs passed by value " Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2025-07-03 18:17   ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-07-04  9:01     ` Alexis Lothoré
2025-07-04 19:59       ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-07-04 21:10         ` Alexis Lothoré [this message]
2025-07-04 20:05   ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-07-04 21:12     ` Alexis Lothoré
2025-07-03  9:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] tests: add some tests validating skipped functions due to uncertain arg location Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2025-07-03 18:31   ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-07-04  9:06     ` Alexis Lothoré
2025-07-03  9:02 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] gitignore: ignore all the test kmod build-related files Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)

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=DB3KUSI90IPO.1AR35OTXH2Y8M@bootlin.com \
    --to=alexis.lothore@bootlin.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alan.maguire@oracle.com \
    --cc=ast@fb.com \
    --cc=bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dwarves@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ebpf@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.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