On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 12:02:57PM +0000, Roberto Sassu wrote:
From: Roberto Sassu [mailto:roberto.sassu@huawei.com] Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2022 9:47 AM
From: Alexei Starovoitov [mailto:alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2022 11:34 PM On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 06:59:28PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
+static int __init bpf_key_sig_kfuncs_init(void) +{
- int ret;
- ret = register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING,
&bpf_key_sig_kfunc_set);- if (!ret)
return 0;- return register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM,
&bpf_key_sig_kfunc_set);Isn't this a watery water ? Don't you have a patch 1 ? What am I missing ?
Uhm, yes. I had doubts too. That was what also KP did.
It makes sense to register once, since we mapped LSM to TRACING.
Will resend only this patch. And I will figure out why CI failed.
Adding in CC Daniel Müller, which worked on this.
I think the issue is that some kernel options are set to =m. This causes the CI to miss all kernel modules, since they are not copied to the virtual machine that executes the tests.
I'm testing this patch:
https://github.com/robertosassu/libbpf-ci/commit/b665e001b58c4ddb792a2a68098...
I commented on the pull request. Would it make sense to adjust the kernel configuration in this repository instead? I am worried that otherwise everybody may need a similar work around, depending on how selftests are ultimately run.
Thanks, Daniel