From: Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>
To: Donglin Peng <dolinux.peng@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nicolas Schier <nicolas.schier@linux.dev>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, dwarves@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/4] resolve_btfids: change in-place update with raw binary output
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:58:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9ac1ab7b-1412-4e81-a993-df95c372c4d8@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6b61c22b-d38c-47c1-8b8f-a37e44866644@linux.dev>
On 11/26/25 11:13 AM, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> On 11/26/25 5:03 AM, Donglin Peng wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 9:29 AM Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> For the kernel modules creating special .bpf.o file is not necessary,
>>> and so embedding of sections data produced by resolve_btfids is
>>> straightforward with the objcopy.
>>
>> The Makefile for the bpf selftests also needs be updated too:
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.18-rc7/source/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile#L708
>>
>> This results in the self-test for resolve_btfids failing:
>> $./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t resolve_btfids -v
>> ...
>> test_resolve_btfids:PASS:id_check 0 nsec
>> test_resolve_btfids:FAIL:id_check wrong ID for S (0 != 3)
>
> Good catch, thanks.
>
> I remember I noticed this at some point, and then forgot...
>
> Interestingly this test passes on CI [1]:
>
> 2025-11-26T03:09:52.0908317Z #366 reg_bounds_rand_ranges_u64_u64:OK
> 2025-11-26T03:09:52.0925114Z #367 resolve_btfids:OK
> 2025-11-26T03:09:52.3904190Z #368/1 res_spin_lock_failure/res_spin_lock_arg:OK
>
> I'll take a closer look.
I figured out why this test was flaky.
Even though I removed elf_update() call from resolve_btfids, the ELF
was opened with:
elf = elf_begin(fd, ELF_C_RDWR_MMAP, NULL);
And the buffers which resolve_btfids writes to are from Elf_Data
returned by elf_getdata(). And so the file might actually get written
to in-place, which is why the resolve_btfids test passed for me with
no changes to the selftests.
I switched ELF_C_RDWR_MMAP to ELF_C_READ_MMAP_PRIVATE, and then the
ELF reliably remains intact (and the test fails). From libelf.h:
ELF_C_READ_MMAP_PRIVATE, /* Read, but memory is writable, results are
not written to the file. */
It makes sense to use this for what resolve_btfids is doing.
I'll fix selftests/bpf/Makefile in the next revision.
>
> [1] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/19690981192/job/56406840021
>
>>
>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-26 23:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-26 1:26 [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/4] resolve_btfids: Support for BTF modifications Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 1:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/4] resolve_btfids: rename object btf field to btf_path Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 1:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/4] resolve_btfids: factor out load_btf() Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 1:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/4] resolve_btfids: introduce enum btf_id_kind Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 2:09 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-26 19:08 ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 1:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/4] resolve_btfids: change in-place update with raw binary output Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 4:46 ` Donglin Peng
2025-11-26 18:22 ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 18:32 ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 13:03 ` Donglin Peng
2025-11-26 19:13 ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-11-26 23:58 ` Ihor Solodrai [this message]
2025-11-26 12:36 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/4] resolve_btfids: Support for BTF modifications Alan Maguire
2025-11-26 19:01 ` Ihor Solodrai
2025-12-02 12:56 ` Alan Maguire
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=9ac1ab7b-1412-4e81-a993-df95c372c4d8@linux.dev \
--to=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=alan.maguire@oracle.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dolinux.peng@gmail.com \
--cc=dwarves@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=nicolas.schier@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@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