public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
> 
>>
>>
>>> [...]
>>>
> 


  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