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 63C891DF75A; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 20:42:23 +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=1764016944; cv=none; b=FASRvmEfdUQMYDoX3wGlQy93OFeeikPo2x9jxBl/+zZmX81kGoZJIi9zxQ62aVoPlAbpty+8bZY4QJb2Aqcm411H+vlmP8Q3867VKqVZ1PAlhBpqcxh8onn1qBpIzArqURHhichX8If8dcSnyNNjx6nas3v7l7VQdLCh258aBBY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764016944; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Si7eTK2/BZuVYtQFbflprK/KYJ4whdcxNyG6sL2lt+I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=lpMCUKC2rBXupBTLvoF+5iEW7drh5sVhV/MLQHu6/q6YlLHZyXLuXkwlNEv1LmqNK77HPL5bpSwLTSO4udB+iyKMNCN2T/mrOTW3ip3E4jaVioNFNvNjjUo5N64Mf2kvvNbLwBJlUgOeYTP/NUBOQKaHPXslHph6Qk3NQkmpLAs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=roWO5oSC; 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="roWO5oSC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CA22C4CEF1; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 20:42:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1764016943; bh=Si7eTK2/BZuVYtQFbflprK/KYJ4whdcxNyG6sL2lt+I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=roWO5oSChBQC5M9L+H/X0SrcgcdHG9KED5r9YMT1ouRulQwJq4DMnoC0maaXmz1gG 74DzdwNIUH3SupUIJxCYFZ5LVKkxCxzZBNPlKHbRgpcDyOVexU7Ibk7WT54gKgOLgL d/thfo/UQDXRpGpLmuJIf9Kc28vhlzUBycPGmJE9QPMOx4EvPeGu9TPE0Nkx93/GXT zfAj0SxOteqK9fMWlCJ1OEMnUnfWqigYEuhC/8Hh4jaQxHMhNtr+GxpNPF4QmYPcgm R8qAqrpcGcL6RNKRyOKXeHSaYwERTTk3SrTnN1vknSJw/VKZ4/Xkl242m9C1v8R/Pz mNmGj1jLfwUeA== Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 12:42:22 -0800 From: Namhyung Kim To: Quentin Monnet Cc: Alan Maguire , 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> <7c86f05f-2ba3-4f63-8d63-49a3b3370360@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@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 Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 09:24:49AM +0000, Quentin Monnet wrote: > 2025-11-19 17:56 UTC-0800 ~ Namhyung Kim > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 10:20:22AM +0000, Alan Maguire wrote: > >> On 28/10/2025 09:05, 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. > >>> > >>> 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. > >>> > >> > >> One issue here is that some distros package openssl v3 such that the > >> #include files are in /usr/include/openssl3 and libraries in > >> /usr/lib64/openssl3 so that older versions can co-exist. Maybe we could > >> figure out a feature test that handles that too? > > > > What's the state of this? Is the fix in the bpf tree now? > > > Hi Namhyung, Alan just submitted a v2 of his patch (targetting > bpf-next), see: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251120084754.640405-2-alan.maguire@oracle.com/ Hello Quentin, I'm afraid it doesn't fix my issue. It seems to fix another problem about the error API. But I still see the build failure. Thanks, Namhyung