lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree
Hi all,

On Wed, 8 Apr 2015 15:03:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:54:05 +0200 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 04/07/2015 06:18 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On 4/7/15 4:13 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > >> [ Cc'ing Dave, fyi ]
> > >>
> > >> On 04/07/2015 11:05 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:56:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann
> > >>> <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
> > >>>> On 04/07/2015 10:48 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >>>>> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > >>>>>> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> kernel/events/core.c: In function 'perf_event_set_bpf_prog':
> > >>>>>> kernel/events/core.c:6732:15: error: 'struct bpf_prog_aux' has no
> > >>>>>> member named 'prog_type'
> > >>>>>> if (prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
> > >>>>>> ^
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Caused by commit 2541517c32be ("tracing, perf: Implement BPF programs
> > >>>>>> attached to kprobes").
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Note, this must be some (rarely triggered) aspect of the ppc64
> > >>>>> defconfig that neither x86 randconfigs nor most other arch defconfigs
> > >>>>> expose?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Note, this is a merge conflict with the work that went via net-next
> > >>>> tree,
> > >>>> i.e. 24701ecea76b ("ebpf: move read-only fields to bpf_prog and shrink
> > >>>> bpf_prog_aux"). I believe that is why it didn't trigger on tip tree.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You should be able to resolve it in linux-next by changing the test to:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> if (prog->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks Daniel, I will do that tomorrow. Someone will have to remember
> > >>> to tell Linus.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, indeed, depending which tree is merged first.
> > >
> > > Daniel analysis is correct, but the fix for kernel/events/core.c
> > > should be:
> > > - if (prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
> > > + if (prog->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
> > > instead of 'prog->prog_type'
> >
> > Yes, absolutely, thanks!
>
> So I have applied that as a merge fix patch.

This patch is now needed when the net-next tree is merged with Linus'
tree.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-15 04:01    [W:0.087 / U:3.904 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site