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 8538F3148DD; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 20:38:01 +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=1764275882; cv=none; b=Z8omIzYO8pzrOMmLhhwg+C26FEg6bJDIo+sRExKox3zHhM/OQ/c+orphx3t0ZE4w0NY54Uiv9rIQ3OOn9XqSsYeX0psInR+Qt/YkiInShGrq3j8ZFdAqDNZX5tWjlQ5/+9hrRtu//k9Jf4wJj2kzkFHeXyl7yLYuArK8m1mghjQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764275882; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Cp8XjMEMIQGDgaW126YwhZBe9XSDeHEVMtmeXBC3cgw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=oRSR64G/PlLTAL7+utL5HQ8Yma3vSZkaVn3aSoXZKHC/ZjzlENVY8J6kx1IqL+yHwHczbOZ9D6rEd51SCT6J340wFXBkaqes92fixIJeqihsCLK0Vqhm3Z9zuu8CkbySjqiL8mptbjEIrCCLt6mOT9beFIo8BsAyRkhUFvVXSDI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=dzSm+9D0; 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="dzSm+9D0" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E980C4CEF8; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 20:38:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1764275881; bh=Cp8XjMEMIQGDgaW126YwhZBe9XSDeHEVMtmeXBC3cgw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dzSm+9D0/wjPJMw0sPH8xieRhkbwa/cTez9bcp4bDk4qPWlZGEs170JT4cZn8AiJS maafipsYMrXhvshOJ3DrauKM2xuBFhKwFDaVcNAhrKdkCsljfL4mmZITQE3L0SKoBM lH+3YNtOFXpUjgfSvQoeyv6TQssKOfGT8iT+drrBlXbP9qDW5zFnFYl/6dq+7fXdzM F6rNMQlBK7k5NX5/UYXTRDhUdtR9HU/9Kj+ndQXmWE/hDCpOopZLP/ixlvl96nIoF6 nmgdI3jhKGXfqHWUB1TW/4zkTxgF+777Zgh4MyQNm9q0Ep9ZyVqZHklqc4zL9aj103 Ac4ttsUqP/A+Q== Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:37:59 -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> <2c94add3-3cb6-41e9-8031-619c996aaf18@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 27, 2025 at 05:44:47PM +0000, Quentin Monnet wrote: > 2025-11-26 10:33 UTC-0800 ~ Namhyung Kim > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 09:03:38AM +0000, Alan Maguire wrote: > >> On 24/11/2025 20:42, Namhyung Kim wrote: > >>> 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. > >>> > >> > >> This header file is delivered by openssl-devel (could be openssl-dev on > >> some distros). Looking at [1], it seems like that package has been a > >> requirement to build kernels from 4.3 on. Is it missing on your system, > >> installed to an unusual path like /usr/include/opensslv3, or is the > >> package perhaps missing some header files? > > > > I think some of my test environments don't have openssl dev packages. > > I didn't know it was required for kernel builds but it wasn't for perf. > > If you guys require it for bpftool, maybe I can make perf disable BPF > > support in case openssl is missing. > > > Hi, yes OpenSSL is a required dependency for bpftool going forward, > sorry to hear it doesn't work well with your environment. I think > there's already an option to turn off BPF skeletons in perf, I'd try > running the Makefile with BUILD_BPF_SKEL=0 maybe. Yes, we have it. Thanks for confirming. Namhyung