From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Pinski <quic_apinski@quicinc.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: use __builtin_preserve_field_info for GCC compatibility
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 16:33:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJPmX8xc5x0W_r0y@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fea380fb0934d039d19821bba88130e632bbfe8d.1754438581.git.sam@gentoo.org>
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 01:03:01AM +0100, Sam James wrote:
> When exploring building bpf_skel with GCC's BPF support, there was a
> buid failure because of bpf_core_field_exists vs the mem_hops bitfield:
> ```
> In file included from util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c:6:
> util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c: In function 'perf_get_sample':
> tools/perf/libbpf/include/bpf/bpf_core_read.h:169:42: error: cannot take address of bit-field 'mem_hops'
> 169 | #define ___bpf_field_ref1(field) (&(field))
> | ^
> tools/perf/libbpf/include/bpf/bpf_helpers.h:222:29: note: in expansion of macro '___bpf_field_ref1'
> 222 | #define ___bpf_concat(a, b) a ## b
> | ^
> tools/perf/libbpf/include/bpf/bpf_helpers.h:225:29: note: in expansion of macro '___bpf_concat'
> 225 | #define ___bpf_apply(fn, n) ___bpf_concat(fn, n)
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> tools/perf/libbpf/include/bpf/bpf_core_read.h:173:9: note: in expansion of macro '___bpf_apply'
> 173 | ___bpf_apply(___bpf_field_ref, ___bpf_narg(args))(args)
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> tools/perf/libbpf/include/bpf/bpf_core_read.h:188:39: note: in expansion of macro '___bpf_field_ref'
> 188 | __builtin_preserve_field_info(___bpf_field_ref(field), BPF_FIELD_EXISTS)
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c:167:29: note: in expansion of macro 'bpf_core_field_exists'
> 167 | if (bpf_core_field_exists(data->mem_hops))
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> cc1: error: argument is not a field access
> ```
>
> ___bpf_field_ref1 was adapted for GCC in 12bbcf8e840f40b82b02981e96e0a5fbb0703ea9
> but the trick added for compatibility in 3a8b8fc3174891c4c12f5766d82184a82d4b2e3e
> isn't compatible with that as an address is used as an argument.
>
> Workaround this by calling __builtin_preserve_field_info directly as the
> bpf_core_field_exists macro does, but without the ___bpf_field_ref use.
IIUC GCC doesn't support bpf_core_fields_exists() for bitfield members,
right? Is it gonna change in the future?
>
> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/PR121420
> Co-authored-by: Andrew Pinski <quic_apinski@quicinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
> ---
> tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c
> index b195e6efeb8be..e5666d4c17228 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.bpf.c
> @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ static inline __u64 perf_get_sample(struct bpf_perf_event_data_kern *kctx,
> if (entry->part == 8) {
> union perf_mem_data_src___new *data = (void *)&kctx->data->data_src;
>
> - if (bpf_core_field_exists(data->mem_hops))
> + if (__builtin_preserve_field_info(data->mem_hops, BPF_FIELD_EXISTS))
I believe those two are equivalent (maybe worth a comment?). But it'd
be great if BPF/clang folks can review if it's ok.
Anyway, I can build it with clang.
Tested-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Thanks,
Namhyung
> return data->mem_hops;
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.50.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-06 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-06 0:03 [PATCH] perf: use __builtin_preserve_field_info for GCC compatibility Sam James
2025-08-06 23:33 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
2025-08-06 23:57 ` Andrew Pinski
2025-08-07 0:27 ` Yonghong Song
2025-08-07 0:15 ` Yonghong Song
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=aJPmX8xc5x0W_r0y@google.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=quic_apinski@quicinc.com \
--cc=sam@gentoo.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).