diff mbox series

bpf: fix warning for bpf_cpumask in verifier

Message ID 20240208100115.602172-1-hbathini@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit 11f522256e9043b0fcd2f994278645d3e201d20c
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series bpf: fix warning for bpf_cpumask in verifier | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
netdev/series_format warning Single patches do not need cover letters; Target tree name not specified in the subject
netdev/tree_selection success Guessed tree name to be net-next
netdev/ynl success Generated files up to date; no warnings/errors; no diff in generated;
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 1060 this patch: 1060
netdev/build_tools success No tools touched, skip
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 10 maintainers not CCed: jolsa@kernel.org john.fastabend@gmail.com yonghong.song@linux.dev andrii@kernel.org martin.lau@linux.dev song@kernel.org sdf@google.com eddyz87@gmail.com kpsingh@kernel.org haoluo@google.com
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 1066 this patch: 1066
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api success None detected
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 1077 this patch: 1077
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 9 lines checked
netdev/build_clang_rust success No Rust files in patch. Skipping build
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / veristat / veristat on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-41 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-39 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_cpuv4, false, 360) / test_progs_cpuv4 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-40 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build / build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build / build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for s390x-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build / build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-42 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-18 and -O2 optimization
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-17 and -O2 optimization
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-0 success Logs for Lint
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for Validate matrix.py
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for Unittests

Commit Message

Hari Bathini Feb. 8, 2024, 10:01 a.m. UTC 
Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
warning:

  "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"

Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.

Signed-off-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Comments

Stanislav Fomichev Feb. 8, 2024, 7:56 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 02/08, Hari Bathini wrote:
> Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
> warning:
> 
>   "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"
> 
> Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.

Can you explain a bit more on why CONFIG_BPF_JIT is appropriate here?
kernel/bpf/cpumask.c seems to be gated by CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL.
So presumably all those symbols should be still compiled in with !CONFIG_BPF_JIT?
Hari Bathini Feb. 12, 2024, 9:56 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 09/02/24 1:26 am, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 02/08, Hari Bathini wrote:
>> Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
>> warning:
>>
>>    "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"
>>
>> Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.
> 
> Can you explain a bit more on why CONFIG_BPF_JIT is appropriate here?
> kernel/bpf/cpumask.c seems to be gated by CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL.
> So presumably all those symbols should be still compiled in with !CONFIG_BPF_JIT?

Actually, CONFIG_BPF_JIT is the precondition for cpumask.c
where bpf_cpumask structure is defined.

   ifeq ($(CONFIG_BPF_JIT),y)
   obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) += bpf_struct_ops.o
   obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) += cpumask.o
   obj-${CONFIG_BPF_LSM} += bpf_lsm.o
   endif

Thanks
Hari
Jiri Olsa Feb. 12, 2024, 11:58 a.m. UTC | #3 
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 03:31:15PM +0530, Hari Bathini wrote:
> Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
> warning:
> 
>   "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"
> 
> Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

jirka

> ---
>  kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 65f598694d55..b263f093ee76 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -5227,7 +5227,9 @@ BTF_ID(struct, prog_test_ref_kfunc)
>  #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
>  BTF_ID(struct, cgroup)
>  #endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
>  BTF_ID(struct, bpf_cpumask)
> +#endif
>  BTF_ID(struct, task_struct)
>  BTF_SET_END(rcu_protected_types)
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 
>
Stanislav Fomichev Feb. 12, 2024, 4:46 p.m. UTC | #4 
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:56 AM Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 09/02/24 1:26 am, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > On 02/08, Hari Bathini wrote:
> >> Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
> >> warning:
> >>
> >>    "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"
> >>
> >> Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.
> >
> > Can you explain a bit more on why CONFIG_BPF_JIT is appropriate here?
> > kernel/bpf/cpumask.c seems to be gated by CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL.
> > So presumably all those symbols should be still compiled in with !CONFIG_BPF_JIT?
>
> Actually, CONFIG_BPF_JIT is the precondition for cpumask.c
> where bpf_cpumask structure is defined.
>
>    ifeq ($(CONFIG_BPF_JIT),y)
>    obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) += bpf_struct_ops.o
>    obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) += cpumask.o
>    obj-${CONFIG_BPF_LSM} += bpf_lsm.o
>    endif

Ah, good point!

Acked-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
David Vernet Feb. 12, 2024, 4:53 p.m. UTC | #5 
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 03:31:15PM +0530, Hari Bathini wrote:
> Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
> warning:
> 
>   "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"
> 
> Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.

Thanks for the fix!

> Signed-off-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>

Acked-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org Feb. 13, 2024, 7:20 p.m. UTC | #6 
Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (master)
by Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>:

On Thu,  8 Feb 2024 15:31:15 +0530 you wrote:
> Compiling with CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL & !CONFIG_BPF_JIT throws the below
> warning:
> 
>   "WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cpumask"
> 
> Fix it by adding the appropriate #ifdef.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - bpf: fix warning for bpf_cpumask in verifier
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/11f522256e90

You are awesome, thank you!
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 65f598694d55..b263f093ee76 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -5227,7 +5227,9 @@  BTF_ID(struct, prog_test_ref_kfunc)
 #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
 BTF_ID(struct, cgroup)
 #endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
 BTF_ID(struct, bpf_cpumask)
+#endif
 BTF_ID(struct, task_struct)
 BTF_SET_END(rcu_protected_types)