On Sun, Jul 07, 2024 at 03:34:15PM +0800, WangYuli wrote:
On 2024/7/6 17:30, Greg KH wrote:
This makes it sound like you are reverting this because of a build error, which is not the case here, right? Isn't this because of the powerpc issue reported here: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240705203413.wbv2nw3747vjeibk@altlinux.org ?
No, it only occurs on ARM64 architecture. The reason is that before being modified, the function
bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro() in arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c +1651
was introduced with __must_check, which is defined as __attribute__((__warn_unused_result__)).
However, at this point, calling bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro(header) coincidentally results in an unused-result
warning.
Ok, thanks, but why is no one else seeing this in their testing?
If not, why not just backport the single missing arm64 commit,
Upstream commit 1dad391daef1 ("bpf, arm64: use bpf_prog_pack for memory management") is part of
a larger change that involves multiple commits. It's not an isolated commit.
We could certainly backport all of them to solve this problem, but it's not the simplest solution.
reverting the change feels wrong in that you will still have the bug present that it was trying to solve, right? If so, can you then provide a working version?
thanks,
greg k-h