Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
On 2015/6/30 22:34, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:29:08AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu: On 2015/6/30 3:41, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to "on", so that I can test this stuff. But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ This patch tries to check the version of bpf.h, because old bpf.h doesn't define 'kern_version' field for 'union bpf_attr'. Ok, I realise it needs to find some bpf.h file, but where should it look for it? What needs to be installed so that this feature test succeeds? I think the problem you meet is caused by missing of kernel headers in your host system environment. After patch 'perf tools: Make perf depend on libbpf' What is precise path to this bpf.h file? What was the cset that introduced it and in what upstream branch is it? The exact bpf.h patch 2/50 trying to find should be /usr/include/linux/bpf.h, which can be found from /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.d: /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.bin: test-bpf.c \ /usr/include/stdc-predef.h \ /usr/include/bits/predefs.h \ /usr/include/linux/bpf.h \ /usr/include/linux/types.h \ After applying 3/50, due to the setting of FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf, it becomes /path/to/kernel/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h, so it won't fail again: /tmp/build/bpf/feature/test-bpf.bin: test-bpf.c \ /usr/include/stdc-predef.h \ /usr/include/bits/predefs.h \ /path/to/kernel/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h \ /path/to/kernel/tools/include/linux/types.h \ ... this checking should always success because it adds required headers into MANIFEST and setup FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf. Also, after applying 3/50 you should see this: IIRC I tried yesterday, will try again later and let you know, but when introducing a feature test, please state what is required to be installed in a system so that it can succeed, where to obtain it, etc. It is possible to figure this out, but sometimes doing that takes time that would be beter invested in processing further patches... - Arnaldo # make O=/tmp/build/bpf/ -C tools/lib/bpf/ Auto-detecting system features: ...libelf: [ on ] ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ on ] ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] ... bpf: [ on ] make: Entering directory `/home/wn/kernel-hydrogen/tools/lib/bpf' CC /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.o LD /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf-in.o LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.a LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.so make: Leaving directory `/home/wn/kernel/tools/lib/bpf' Even if in perf checking bpf should fail in your machine now, checking bpf feature in libbpf should success because when build libbpf I have added following setting to tools/lib/bpf/Makefile: INCLUDES = -I. -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi -I$(srctree)/include/uapi FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf = $(INCLUDES) Do you want me to squash 2/30 and 3/50 together and append 'bpf' checker into FEATURE_TESTS in tools/build/Makefile.feature in 23/50? Then there should be less confusion: when compiling perf before 23/50, bpf feature will never be checked then. Thank you. Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
Em Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:29:08AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu: > On 2015/6/30 3:41, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >>So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to "on", > >>so that I can test this stuff. > >>But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, > >>but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions > >>related to some specific changeset in its comments... > >So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file > >with a special name in the O= output dir: > >[acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output > >test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory > > #include > >^ > >compilation terminated. > >[acme@felicio linux]$ > This patch tries to check the version of bpf.h, because old bpf.h doesn't > define 'kern_version' field for 'union bpf_attr'. Ok, I realise it needs to find some bpf.h file, but where should it look for it? What needs to be installed so that this feature test succeeds? > I think the problem you meet is caused by missing of kernel headers in your > host system environment. After patch 'perf tools: Make perf depend on > libbpf' What is precise path to this bpf.h file? What was the cset that introduced it and in what upstream branch is it? > this checking should always success because it adds required headers > into MANIFEST and setup FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf. > > Also, after applying 3/50 you should see this: IIRC I tried yesterday, will try again later and let you know, but when introducing a feature test, please state what is required to be installed in a system so that it can succeed, where to obtain it, etc. It is possible to figure this out, but sometimes doing that takes time that would be beter invested in processing further patches... - Arnaldo > # make O=/tmp/build/bpf/ -C tools/lib/bpf/ > Auto-detecting system features: > ...libelf: [ on ] > ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ on ] > ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] > ... bpf: [ on ] > > make: Entering directory `/home/wn/kernel-hydrogen/tools/lib/bpf' > CC /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.o > LD /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf-in.o > LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.a > LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.so > make: Leaving directory `/home/wn/kernel/tools/lib/bpf' > > Even if in perf checking bpf should fail in your machine now, checking bpf > feature in > libbpf should success because when build libbpf I have added following > setting to > tools/lib/bpf/Makefile: > > INCLUDES = -I. -I$(srctree)/tools/include > -I$(srctree)/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi -I$(srctree)/include/uapi > FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf = $(INCLUDES) > > Do you want me to squash 2/30 and 3/50 together and append 'bpf' checker > into FEATURE_TESTS in > tools/build/Makefile.feature in 23/50? Then there should be less confusion: > when compiling perf > before 23/50, bpf feature will never be checked then. > > Thank you. > > >Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: > > > >[acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h > >./include/linux/bpf.h > >./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > >[acme@felicio linux]$ > > > >So lemme try doing it in place: > > > >[acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ > >make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' > > BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build > > > >Auto-detecting system features: > >... dwarf: [ on ] > >... glibc: [ on ] > >... gtk2: [ on ] > >... libaudit: [ on ] > >...libbfd: [ on ] > >...libelf: [ on ] > >... libnuma: [ on ] > >... libperl: [ on ] > >... libpython: [ on ] > >... libslang: [ on ] > >... libunwind: [ on ] > >...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] > >... zlib: [ on ] > >... lzma: [ on ] > >... bpf: [ OFF ] > > > > > >Doesn't work as well :-\ > > > >Looking at the following patches... > > > >- Arnaldo > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
On 2015/6/30 22:34, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:29:08AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu: On 2015/6/30 3:41, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to on, so that I can test this stuff. But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include linux/bpf.h ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ This patch tries to check the version of bpf.h, because old bpf.h doesn't define 'kern_version' field for 'union bpf_attr'. Ok, I realise it needs to find some bpf.h file, but where should it look for it? What needs to be installed so that this feature test succeeds? I think the problem you meet is caused by missing of kernel headers in your host system environment. After patch 'perf tools: Make perf depend on libbpf' What is precise path to this bpf.h file? What was the cset that introduced it and in what upstream branch is it? The exact bpf.h patch 2/50 trying to find should be /usr/include/linux/bpf.h, which can be found from /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.d: /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.bin: test-bpf.c \ /usr/include/stdc-predef.h \ /usr/include/bits/predefs.h \ /usr/include/linux/bpf.h \ /usr/include/linux/types.h \ After applying 3/50, due to the setting of FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf, it becomes /path/to/kernel/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h, so it won't fail again: /tmp/build/bpf/feature/test-bpf.bin: test-bpf.c \ /usr/include/stdc-predef.h \ /usr/include/bits/predefs.h \ /path/to/kernel/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h \ /path/to/kernel/tools/include/linux/types.h \ ... this checking should always success because it adds required headers into MANIFEST and setup FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf. Also, after applying 3/50 you should see this: IIRC I tried yesterday, will try again later and let you know, but when introducing a feature test, please state what is required to be installed in a system so that it can succeed, where to obtain it, etc. It is possible to figure this out, but sometimes doing that takes time that would be beter invested in processing further patches... - Arnaldo # make O=/tmp/build/bpf/ -C tools/lib/bpf/ Auto-detecting system features: ...libelf: [ on ] ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ on ] ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] ... bpf: [ on ] make: Entering directory `/home/wn/kernel-hydrogen/tools/lib/bpf' CC /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.o LD /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf-in.o LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.a LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.so make: Leaving directory `/home/wn/kernel/tools/lib/bpf' Even if in perf checking bpf should fail in your machine now, checking bpf feature in libbpf should success because when build libbpf I have added following setting to tools/lib/bpf/Makefile: INCLUDES = -I. -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi -I$(srctree)/include/uapi FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf = $(INCLUDES) Do you want me to squash 2/30 and 3/50 together and append 'bpf' checker into FEATURE_TESTS in tools/build/Makefile.feature in 23/50? Then there should be less confusion: when compiling perf before 23/50, bpf feature will never be checked then. Thank you. Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
Em Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:29:08AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu: On 2015/6/30 3:41, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to on, so that I can test this stuff. But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include linux/bpf.h ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ This patch tries to check the version of bpf.h, because old bpf.h doesn't define 'kern_version' field for 'union bpf_attr'. Ok, I realise it needs to find some bpf.h file, but where should it look for it? What needs to be installed so that this feature test succeeds? I think the problem you meet is caused by missing of kernel headers in your host system environment. After patch 'perf tools: Make perf depend on libbpf' What is precise path to this bpf.h file? What was the cset that introduced it and in what upstream branch is it? this checking should always success because it adds required headers into MANIFEST and setup FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf. Also, after applying 3/50 you should see this: IIRC I tried yesterday, will try again later and let you know, but when introducing a feature test, please state what is required to be installed in a system so that it can succeed, where to obtain it, etc. It is possible to figure this out, but sometimes doing that takes time that would be beter invested in processing further patches... - Arnaldo # make O=/tmp/build/bpf/ -C tools/lib/bpf/ Auto-detecting system features: ...libelf: [ on ] ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ on ] ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] ... bpf: [ on ] make: Entering directory `/home/wn/kernel-hydrogen/tools/lib/bpf' CC /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.o LD /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf-in.o LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.a LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.so make: Leaving directory `/home/wn/kernel/tools/lib/bpf' Even if in perf checking bpf should fail in your machine now, checking bpf feature in libbpf should success because when build libbpf I have added following setting to tools/lib/bpf/Makefile: INCLUDES = -I. -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi -I$(srctree)/include/uapi FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf = $(INCLUDES) Do you want me to squash 2/30 and 3/50 together and append 'bpf' checker into FEATURE_TESTS in tools/build/Makefile.feature in 23/50? Then there should be less confusion: when compiling perf before 23/50, bpf feature will never be checked then. Thank you. Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
On 2015/6/30 3:41, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 04:21:51PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: Em Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:15:07PM +, Wang Nan escreveu: In this patch, eBPF API is checked by compiling a c source file which uses fields in bpf_attr which will be used by libbpf. Signed-off-by: Wang Nan Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov So, I just applied this and after trying: [acme@felicio linux]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/perf ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/perf ; make O=/tmp/build/perf -C tools/perf install-bin make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] MKDIR/tmp/build/perf/util/ CC /tmp/build/perf/util/abspath.o So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to "on", so that I can test this stuff. But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ This patch tries to check the version of bpf.h, because old bpf.h doesn't define 'kern_version' field for 'union bpf_attr'. I think the problem you meet is caused by missing of kernel headers in your host system environment. After patch 'perf tools: Make perf depend on libbpf' this checking should always success because it adds required headers into MANIFEST and setup FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf. Also, after applying 3/50 you should see this: # make O=/tmp/build/bpf/ -C tools/lib/bpf/ Auto-detecting system features: ...libelf: [ on ] ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ on ] ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] ... bpf: [ on ] make: Entering directory `/home/wn/kernel-hydrogen/tools/lib/bpf' CC /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.o LD /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf-in.o LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.a LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.so make: Leaving directory `/home/wn/kernel/tools/lib/bpf' Even if in perf checking bpf should fail in your machine now, checking bpf feature in libbpf should success because when build libbpf I have added following setting to tools/lib/bpf/Makefile: INCLUDES = -I. -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi -I$(srctree)/include/uapi FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf = $(INCLUDES) Do you want me to squash 2/30 and 3/50 together and append 'bpf' checker into FEATURE_TESTS in tools/build/Makefile.feature in 23/50? Then there should be less confusion: when compiling perf before 23/50, bpf feature will never be checked then. Thank you. Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
Em Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 04:21:51PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > Em Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:15:07PM +, Wang Nan escreveu: > > In this patch, eBPF API is checked by compiling a c source file which > > uses fields in bpf_attr which will be used by libbpf. > > > > Signed-off-by: Wang Nan > > Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov > > So, I just applied this and after trying: > > [acme@felicio linux]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/perf ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/perf > ; make O=/tmp/build/perf -C tools/perf install-bin > make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' > BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build > > Auto-detecting system features: > ... dwarf: [ on ] > ... glibc: [ on ] > ... gtk2: [ on ] > ... libaudit: [ on ] > ...libbfd: [ on ] > ...libelf: [ on ] > ... libnuma: [ on ] > ... libperl: [ on ] > ... libpython: [ on ] > ... libslang: [ on ] > ... libunwind: [ on ] > ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] > ... zlib: [ on ] > ... lzma: [ on ] > ... bpf: [ OFF ] > > MKDIR/tmp/build/perf/util/ > CC /tmp/build/perf/util/abspath.o > > > > So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to "on", > so that I can test this stuff. > > But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, > but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions > related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
Em Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:15:07PM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
> In this patch, eBPF API is checked by compiling a c source file which
> uses fields in bpf_attr which will be used by libbpf.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan
> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov
So, I just applied this and after trying:
[acme@felicio linux]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/perf ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/perf
; make O=/tmp/build/perf -C tools/perf install-bin
make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf'
BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build
Auto-detecting system features:
... dwarf: [ on ]
... glibc: [ on ]
... gtk2: [ on ]
... libaudit: [ on ]
...libbfd: [ on ]
...libelf: [ on ]
... libnuma: [ on ]
... libperl: [ on ]
... libpython: [ on ]
... libslang: [ on ]
... libunwind: [ on ]
...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ]
... zlib: [ on ]
... lzma: [ on ]
... bpf: [ OFF ]
MKDIR/tmp/build/perf/util/
CC /tmp/build/perf/util/abspath.o
So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to "on",
so that I can test this stuff.
But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter,
but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions
related to some specific changeset in its comments...
- Arnaldo
> ---
> tools/build/Makefile.feature | 6 --
> tools/build/feature/Makefile | 6 +-
> tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c | 18 ++
> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/build/Makefile.feature b/tools/build/Makefile.feature
> index 2975632..5ec6b37 100644
> --- a/tools/build/Makefile.feature
> +++ b/tools/build/Makefile.feature
> @@ -51,7 +51,8 @@ FEATURE_TESTS ?=\
> timerfd \
> libdw-dwarf-unwind \
> zlib\
> - lzma
> + lzma\
> + bpf
>
> FEATURE_DISPLAY ?= \
> dwarf \
> @@ -67,7 +68,8 @@ FEATURE_DISPLAY ?= \
> libunwind \
> libdw-dwarf-unwind \
> zlib\
> - lzma
> + lzma\
> + bpf
>
> # Set FEATURE_CHECK_(C|LD)FLAGS-all for all FEATURE_TESTS features.
> # If in the future we need per-feature checks/flags for features not
> diff --git a/tools/build/feature/Makefile b/tools/build/feature/Makefile
> index 463ed8f..1c0d69f 100644
> --- a/tools/build/feature/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/build/feature/Makefile
> @@ -33,7 +33,8 @@ FILES= \
> test-compile-32.bin \
> test-compile-x32.bin\
> test-zlib.bin \
> - test-lzma.bin
> + test-lzma.bin \
> + test-bpf.bin
>
> CC := $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc -MD
> PKG_CONFIG := $(CROSS_COMPILE)pkg-config
> @@ -156,6 +157,9 @@ test-zlib.bin:
> test-lzma.bin:
> $(BUILD) -llzma
>
> +test-bpf.bin:
> + $(BUILD)
> +
> -include *.d
>
> ###
> diff --git a/tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c b/tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..062bac8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
> +#include
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> + union bpf_attr attr;
> +
> + attr.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE;
> + attr.insn_cnt = 0;
> + attr.insns = 0;
> + attr.license = 0;
> + attr.log_buf = 0;
> + attr.log_size = 0;
> + attr.log_level = 0;
> + attr.kern_version = 0;
> +
> + attr = attr;
> + return 0;
> +}
> --
> 1.8.3.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
On 2015/6/30 3:41, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 04:21:51PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: Em Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:15:07PM +, Wang Nan escreveu: In this patch, eBPF API is checked by compiling a c source file which uses fields in bpf_attr which will be used by libbpf. Signed-off-by: Wang Nan wangn...@huawei.com Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov a...@plumgrid.com So, I just applied this and after trying: [acme@felicio linux]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/perf ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/perf ; make O=/tmp/build/perf -C tools/perf install-bin make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] MKDIR/tmp/build/perf/util/ CC /tmp/build/perf/util/abspath.o So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to on, so that I can test this stuff. But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include linux/bpf.h ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ This patch tries to check the version of bpf.h, because old bpf.h doesn't define 'kern_version' field for 'union bpf_attr'. I think the problem you meet is caused by missing of kernel headers in your host system environment. After patch 'perf tools: Make perf depend on libbpf' this checking should always success because it adds required headers into MANIFEST and setup FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf. Also, after applying 3/50 you should see this: # make O=/tmp/build/bpf/ -C tools/lib/bpf/ Auto-detecting system features: ...libelf: [ on ] ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ on ] ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] ... bpf: [ on ] make: Entering directory `/home/wn/kernel-hydrogen/tools/lib/bpf' CC /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.o LD /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf-in.o LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.a LINK /tmp/build/bpf/libbpf.so make: Leaving directory `/home/wn/kernel/tools/lib/bpf' Even if in perf checking bpf should fail in your machine now, checking bpf feature in libbpf should success because when build libbpf I have added following setting to tools/lib/bpf/Makefile: INCLUDES = -I. -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi -I$(srctree)/include/uapi FEATURE_CHECK_CFLAGS-bpf = $(INCLUDES) Do you want me to squash 2/30 and 3/50 together and append 'bpf' checker into FEATURE_TESTS in tools/build/Makefile.feature in 23/50? Then there should be less confusion: when compiling perf before 23/50, bpf feature will never be checked then. Thank you. Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
Em Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:15:07PM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
In this patch, eBPF API is checked by compiling a c source file which
uses fields in bpf_attr which will be used by libbpf.
Signed-off-by: Wang Nan wangn...@huawei.com
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov a...@plumgrid.com
So, I just applied this and after trying:
[acme@felicio linux]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/perf ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/perf
; make O=/tmp/build/perf -C tools/perf install-bin
make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf'
BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build
Auto-detecting system features:
... dwarf: [ on ]
... glibc: [ on ]
... gtk2: [ on ]
... libaudit: [ on ]
...libbfd: [ on ]
...libelf: [ on ]
... libnuma: [ on ]
... libperl: [ on ]
... libpython: [ on ]
... libslang: [ on ]
... libunwind: [ on ]
...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ]
... zlib: [ on ]
... lzma: [ on ]
... bpf: [ OFF ]
MKDIR/tmp/build/perf/util/
CC /tmp/build/perf/util/abspath.o
So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to on,
so that I can test this stuff.
But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter,
but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions
related to some specific changeset in its comments...
- Arnaldo
---
tools/build/Makefile.feature | 6 --
tools/build/feature/Makefile | 6 +-
tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c | 18 ++
3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c
diff --git a/tools/build/Makefile.feature b/tools/build/Makefile.feature
index 2975632..5ec6b37 100644
--- a/tools/build/Makefile.feature
+++ b/tools/build/Makefile.feature
@@ -51,7 +51,8 @@ FEATURE_TESTS ?=\
timerfd \
libdw-dwarf-unwind \
zlib\
- lzma
+ lzma\
+ bpf
FEATURE_DISPLAY ?= \
dwarf \
@@ -67,7 +68,8 @@ FEATURE_DISPLAY ?= \
libunwind \
libdw-dwarf-unwind \
zlib\
- lzma
+ lzma\
+ bpf
# Set FEATURE_CHECK_(C|LD)FLAGS-all for all FEATURE_TESTS features.
# If in the future we need per-feature checks/flags for features not
diff --git a/tools/build/feature/Makefile b/tools/build/feature/Makefile
index 463ed8f..1c0d69f 100644
--- a/tools/build/feature/Makefile
+++ b/tools/build/feature/Makefile
@@ -33,7 +33,8 @@ FILES= \
test-compile-32.bin \
test-compile-x32.bin\
test-zlib.bin \
- test-lzma.bin
+ test-lzma.bin \
+ test-bpf.bin
CC := $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc -MD
PKG_CONFIG := $(CROSS_COMPILE)pkg-config
@@ -156,6 +157,9 @@ test-zlib.bin:
test-lzma.bin:
$(BUILD) -llzma
+test-bpf.bin:
+ $(BUILD)
+
-include *.d
###
diff --git a/tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c b/tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..062bac8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/build/feature/test-bpf.c
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+#include linux/bpf.h
+
+int main(void)
+{
+ union bpf_attr attr;
+
+ attr.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE;
+ attr.insn_cnt = 0;
+ attr.insns = 0;
+ attr.license = 0;
+ attr.log_buf = 0;
+ attr.log_size = 0;
+ attr.log_level = 0;
+ attr.kern_version = 0;
+
+ attr = attr;
+ return 0;
+}
--
1.8.3.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH v9 02/50] tools build: Add feature check for eBPF API
Em Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 04:21:51PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: Em Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:15:07PM +, Wang Nan escreveu: In this patch, eBPF API is checked by compiling a c source file which uses fields in bpf_attr which will be used by libbpf. Signed-off-by: Wang Nan wangn...@huawei.com Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov a...@plumgrid.com So, I just applied this and after trying: [acme@felicio linux]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/perf ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/perf ; make O=/tmp/build/perf -C tools/perf install-bin make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] MKDIR/tmp/build/perf/util/ CC /tmp/build/perf/util/abspath.o So, what should I do now? I want to have that OFF line turned to on, so that I can test this stuff. But the changelog says nothing about it, lemme check the cover letter, but having to do that is annoying, one expects to have instructions related to some specific changeset in its comments... So, when such build tests fail, we can see why by looking for a file with a special name in the O= output dir: [acme@felicio linux]$ cat /tmp/build/perf/feature/test-bpf.make.output test-bpf.c:1:23: fatal error: linux/bpf.h: No such file or directory #include linux/bpf.h ^ compilation terminated. [acme@felicio linux]$ Right, one of the few things that could explain the failure, but: [acme@felicio linux]$ find . -name bpf.h ./include/linux/bpf.h ./include/uapi/linux/bpf.h [acme@felicio linux]$ So lemme try doing it in place: [acme@felicio linux]$ make -C tools/perf/ make: Entering directory `/home/acme/git/linux/tools/perf' BUILD: Doing 'make -j4' parallel build Auto-detecting system features: ... dwarf: [ on ] ... glibc: [ on ] ... gtk2: [ on ] ... libaudit: [ on ] ...libbfd: [ on ] ...libelf: [ on ] ... libnuma: [ on ] ... libperl: [ on ] ... libpython: [ on ] ... libslang: [ on ] ... libunwind: [ on ] ...libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ] ... zlib: [ on ] ... lzma: [ on ] ... bpf: [ OFF ] Doesn't work as well :-\ Looking at the following patches... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
