[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BYAPR02MB52388A3420C7FBC0B79894CFAA4B9@BYAPR02MB5238.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 00:27:40 +0000
From: "Tyler Wear (QUIC)" <quic_twear@...cinc.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
CC: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
"Tyler Wear (QUIC)" <quic_twear@...cinc.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
"maze@...gle.com" <maze@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Add skb_store_bytes() for BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 1:06 PM
> To: Tyler Wear <twear@...cinc.com>
> Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>; Tyler Wear (QUIC) <quic_twear@...cinc.com>; netdev@...r.kernel.org; bpf@...r.kernel.org;
> maze@...gle.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add skb_store_bytes() for BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB
>
> WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 06:29:05PM +0000, Tyler Wear wrote:
> > Unable to run any bpf tests do to errors below. These occur with and without the new patch. Is this a known issue?
> > Is the new test case required since bpf_skb_store_bytes() is already a tested function for other prog types?
> >
> > libbpf: failed to find BTF for extern 'bpf_testmod_invalid_mod_kfunc'
> > [18] section: -2
> > Error: failed to open BPF object file: No such file or directory
> > libbpf: failed to find BTF info for global/extern symbol 'my_tid'
> > Error: failed to link
> > '/local/mnt/workspace/linux-stable/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/linked_
> > funcs1.o': Unknown error -2 (-2)
> > libbpf: failed to find BTF for extern 'bpf_kfunc_call_test1' [27]
> > section: -2
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/README.rst has details on these.
>
> Ensure the llvm and pahole are up to date.
> Also take a look at the "Testing patches" and "LLVM" section in Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst.
This will also require adding the l3/l4_ csum_replace() api's then. Adding the csum_replace() to a cgroup test case results in the below error during bpf program validation:
"BPF_LD_[ABS|IND] instructions not allowed for this program type"
Is there something else that needs to be added? Or would it be better to create the function just for ds_field?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists