lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] btf: warn but return no error for NULL btf from __register_btf_kfunc_id_set()
Date
Hi Daniel,

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 16:53:38 +0200 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:

> On 6/28/23 6:46 PM, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > __register_btf_kfunc_id_set() assumes .BTF to be part of the module's
> > .ko file if CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF is enabled. If that's not the case,
> > the function prints an error message and return an error. As a result,
> > such modules cannot be loaded.
> >
> > However, the section could be stripped out during a build process. It
> > would be better to let the modules loaded, because their basic
> > functionalities have no problem[1], though the BTF functionalities will
> > not be supported. Make the function to lower the level of the message
> > from error to warn, and return no error.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220219082037.ow2kbq5brktf4f2u@apollo.legion/
> >
> > Reported-by: Alexander Egorenkov <Alexander.Egorenkov@ibm.com>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/87y228q66f.fsf@oc8242746057.ibm.com/
> > Suggested-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220219082037.ow2kbq5brktf4f2u@apollo.legion/
> > Fixes: c446fdacb10d ("bpf: fix register_btf_kfunc_id_set for !CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF")
> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.18.x
> > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
> > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
>
> I presume this one is targeted at bpf (rather than bpf-next) tree, right?

You're correct. It's not urgent for us, but I would prefer it to be merged
into all affected kernels as early as possible.

>
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/btf.c b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
> > index 6b682b8e4b50..d683f034996f 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
> > @@ -7848,14 +7848,10 @@ static int __register_btf_kfunc_id_set(enum btf_kfunc_hook hook,
> >
> > btf = btf_get_module_btf(kset->owner);
> > if (!btf) {
> > - if (!kset->owner && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF)) {
> > - pr_err("missing vmlinux BTF, cannot register kfuncs\n");
> > - return -ENOENT;
> > - }
>
> Why the above one needs to be changed? Do you also run into this case? vmlinux BTF
> should be built-in in this case. I understand it's rather the one below for BTF +
> modules instead, no?

Again, you're correct. This change is not really needed. I was interpreting
Kumar's suggestion merely into code without thinking about his real meaning,
sorry. I will restore this in the next spin.


Thanks,
SJ

>
> > - if (kset->owner && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES)) {
> > - pr_err("missing module BTF, cannot register kfuncs\n");
> > - return -ENOENT;
> > - }
> > + if (!kset->owner && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF))
> > + pr_warn("missing vmlinux BTF, cannot register kfuncs\n");
> > + if (kset->owner && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES))
> > + pr_warn("missing module BTF, cannot register kfuncs\n");
> > return 0;
> > }
> > if (IS_ERR(btf))
> >
>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-06-30 21:50    [W:0.058 / U:0.844 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site