On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 04:11:33PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 07:45:49PM -0700, Daniel Xu wrote:
SNIP
diff --git a/fs/verity/measure.c b/fs/verity/measure.c index bf7a5f4cccaf..3969d54158d1 100644 --- a/fs/verity/measure.c +++ b/fs/verity/measure.c @@ -159,9 +159,9 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_get_fsverity_digest(struct file *file, struct bpf_dynptr_ker __bpf_kfunc_end_defs(); -BTF_SET8_START(fsverity_set_ids) +BTF_KFUNCS_START(fsverity_set_ids) BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_get_fsverity_digest, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS) -BTF_SET8_END(fsverity_set_ids) +BTF_KFUNCS_END(fsverity_set_ids) static int bpf_get_fsverity_digest_filter(const struct bpf_prog *prog, u32 kfunc_id) { diff --git a/kernel/bpf/btf.c b/kernel/bpf/btf.c index 51e8b4bee0c8..8cc718f37a9d 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/btf.c @@ -7802,6 +7802,10 @@ int register_btf_kfunc_id_set(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, { enum btf_kfunc_hook hook;
- /* All kfuncs need to be tagged as such in BTF */
- if (WARN_ON(!(kset->set->flags & BTF_SET8_KFUNCS)))
return -EINVAL;having the warning for module with wrong set8 flags seems wrong to me, I think we should trigger the warn only for kernel calls.. by adding kset->owner check in the condition above
Just checking:
The reasoning is that =m and out-of-tree modules can and should check return code, right?
And =y modules or vmlinux-based registrations do not check return code, so WARN() is necessary?
If so, I'd agree.
[..]
Thanks, Daniel