[bpf-next,00/11] bpf: random unpopular userspace fixes (32 bit et al.)

Message

Alexander Lobakin April 14, 2022, 10:44 p.m. UTC

This mostly issues the cross build (1) errors for 32 bit (2)
MIPS (3) with minimal configuration (4) on Musl (5). The majority
of them aren't yesterday's, so it is a "who does need it outside
of x86_64 or ARM64?" moment again.
Trivial stuff in general, not counting the bpf_cookie build fix.

Alexander Lobakin (11):
  bpf, perf: fix bpftool compilation with !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
  bpf: always emit struct bpf_perf_link BTF
  tools, bpf: fix bpftool build with !CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS
  samples: bpf: add 'asm/mach-generic' include path for every MIPS
  samples: bpf: use host bpftool to generate vmlinux.h, not target
  tools, bpf: fix fcntl.h include in bpftool
  samples: bpf: fix uin64_t format literals
  samples: bpf: fix shifting unsigned long by 32 positions
  samples: bpf: fix include order for non-Glibc environments
  samples: bpf: fix -Wsequence-point
  samples: bpf: xdpsock: fix -Wmaybe-uninitialized

 include/linux/perf_event.h              |  2 ++
 kernel/bpf/syscall.c                    |  4 +++-
 samples/bpf/Makefile                    |  7 ++++---
 samples/bpf/cookie_uid_helper_example.c | 12 ++++++------
 samples/bpf/lathist_kern.c              |  2 +-
 samples/bpf/lwt_len_hist_kern.c         |  2 +-
 samples/bpf/lwt_len_hist_user.c         |  4 ++--
 samples/bpf/task_fd_query_user.c        |  2 +-
 samples/bpf/test_lru_dist.c             |  3 ++-
 samples/bpf/tracex2_kern.c              |  2 +-
 samples/bpf/xdpsock_user.c              |  5 +++--
 tools/bpf/bpftool/tracelog.c            |  2 +-
 12 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

--
2.35.2

Comments

Alexei Starovoitov April 16, 2022, 12:50 a.m. UTC | #1

On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 3:44 PM Alexander Lobakin <[e-mail]> wrote:

Please do not send encrypted patches.
Use plain text.

Also for bpf fixes please use [PATCH bpf] subject.
cc maintainers and bpf@vger only.
There is no need to spam such a huge list of people.

Alexander Lobakin April 16, 2022, 6:01 p.m. UTC | #2

From: Alexei Starovoitov <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 00:50:49 +0000

> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 3:44 PM Alexander Lobakin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Please do not send encrypted patches.
> Use plain text.

Oof, weird. I use ProtonMail Bridge and they claim it doesn't
encrypt mails to non-Proton users. That's the first time I hear
such, I was sending several fixes to LKML a couple weeks ago
from this mail address with no issues (and got them accepted).

>
> Also for bpf fixes please use [PATCH bpf] subject.

I decided to go with bpf-next since it changes the layout of
&perf_event a bit when !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS. But if you're okay
with taking this through the bpf tree, it's even better.

> cc maintainers and bpf@vger only.
> There is no need to spam such a huge list of people.

I usually redirect scripts/get_maintainers.pl to git-send-email
directly, but you're right, sure. Seems like it does overkills
sometimes.

Thanks,
Al

Alexei Starovoitov April 16, 2022, 7:52 p.m. UTC | #3

On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 11:01 AM Alexander Lobakin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <[e-mail]>
> Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 00:50:49 +0000
>
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 3:44 PM Alexander Lobakin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Please do not send encrypted patches.
> > Use plain text.
>
> Oof, weird. I use ProtonMail Bridge and they claim it doesn't
> encrypt mails to non-Proton users. That's the first time I hear
> such, I was sending several fixes to LKML a couple weeks ago
> from this mail address with no issues (and got them accepted).

They come encrypted to gmail inbox. Shrug.

> >
> > Also for bpf fixes please use [PATCH bpf] subject.
>
> I decided to go with bpf-next since it changes the layout of
> &perf_event a bit when !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS. But if you're okay
> with taking this through the bpf tree, it's even better.

I didn't see the patches. Only went with 'unpopular fixes' subject.
If they're not then bpf-next is certainly better.

Andrii Nakryiko April 20, 2022, 5:20 p.m. UTC | #4

On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 3:44 PM Alexander Lobakin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> This mostly issues the cross build (1) errors for 32 bit (2)
> MIPS (3) with minimal configuration (4) on Musl (5). The majority
> of them aren't yesterday's, so it is a "who does need it outside
> of x86_64 or ARM64?" moment again.
> Trivial stuff in general, not counting the bpf_cookie build fix.
>
> Alexander Lobakin (11):
>   bpf, perf: fix bpftool compilation with !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
>   bpf: always emit struct bpf_perf_link BTF
>   tools, bpf: fix bpftool build with !CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS
>   samples: bpf: add 'asm/mach-generic' include path for every MIPS
>   samples: bpf: use host bpftool to generate vmlinux.h, not target
>   tools, bpf: fix fcntl.h include in bpftool
>   samples: bpf: fix uin64_t format literals
>   samples: bpf: fix shifting unsigned long by 32 positions
>   samples: bpf: fix include order for non-Glibc environments
>   samples: bpf: fix -Wsequence-point
>   samples: bpf: xdpsock: fix -Wmaybe-uninitialized
>

For consistency with majority of other commits, can you please use
"samples/bpf: " prefix for samples/bpf changes and "bpftool: " for
bpftool's ones? Thanks!

>  include/linux/perf_event.h              |  2 ++
>  kernel/bpf/syscall.c                    |  4 +++-
>  samples/bpf/Makefile                    |  7 ++++---
>  samples/bpf/cookie_uid_helper_example.c | 12 ++++++------
>  samples/bpf/lathist_kern.c              |  2 +-
>  samples/bpf/lwt_len_hist_kern.c         |  2 +-
>  samples/bpf/lwt_len_hist_user.c         |  4 ++--
>  samples/bpf/task_fd_query_user.c        |  2 +-
>  samples/bpf/test_lru_dist.c             |  3 ++-
>  samples/bpf/tracex2_kern.c              |  2 +-
>  samples/bpf/xdpsock_user.c              |  5 +++--
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/tracelog.c            |  2 +-
>  12 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.35.2
>
>